Why ideologies can make you stupid

I planned to write a blog post titled “Why Scientology makes you stupid”, but then one of the contributors on my blog beat me to it. I am honored to be blessed with many very intelligent people commenting here – it makes my job real easy. I was planning to write the blog post and release it today, but Alanzo did a better job at it than I would have done. While I planned to center my post on Scientology, Al broadened the scope to ideologies or belief systems in general:


A “belief system” is a cognitive structure, a way to see the world where your moral choices, your attitudes, and your feelings, are all pre-wired and structured ahead of time for you.

Here’s a made-up example of a belief system I will create for you as an example: “Reaganism”.

The Axioms of “Reaganism”:

  1. The government destroys everything it touches. Any time the government gets involved, whatever activity was supposed to happen that was useful becomes corrupted, over-priced and useless after the government gets done with it.
  2. Private enterprise can always do a better job of anything than the government can. The attempt to turn a profit always makes an activity more efficient and productive for everyone.
  3. Therefore, government should be run by businesses because businesses can always do a better job at anything than the government can.

So when you adopt Reaganism as your belief system and become a Reaganologist, you look out onto the infinitely big, wide world that actually exists out there, and you have the pre-wiring and the cognitive structures of Reaganism interpret and categorize the infinity of all you see into simple little chunks for you.

Government run road projects are filled with people who just stand around all day and never get any work done. Even though you are driving on a road ( a road built by a government run road project) you never notice that. You sneer and become resentful at all these lazy bums working on this road. Your belief structure has filtered out some things that do not conform to it and accepted others that do conform to it, and given you attitudes and emotions to feel per its dictates.

The Titans of Industry are heros to you, because they embody all the values that you have adopted as a Reaganologist, You swell with pride every time you see a CEO of Goldmann Sachs on TV and you can’t believe that any government bureaucrat at the SEC would ever question his business practices. Government oversight is criminal in your mind, and suppressive to the upstats in society.

As a Reaganologist, you see the world in the way that Reaganism dictates.

The advantage of a belief system, or an ideology, is that it takes the infinite world around you and breaks it up into bite-size chunks, with all of it pre-understood ahead of time. It makes things simpler.

This, once you have adopted a belief system, is also its disadvantage. You don’t see the world as it is any more. You see it only as your ideology dictates that you see it.

No ideology can match the infinity of life, or the infinity of you. The stronger you hold on to an ideology, the smaller, and more fixed, you become.

As more and more of the infinities of life hit you that do not fit into your ideological helmet, the more tightly you pull it down onto your self. Until at last, you become fixed and pinheaded.

This is the problem with belief systems.

380 thoughts on “Why ideologies can make you stupid

  1. Geir, based on Alanzo’s post, it seems you are using either definition “b” or “c” or both for the definition of ideology:

    a : a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture
    b : a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture
    c : the integrated assertions, theories and aims that constitute a sociopolitical program
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ideology

    Both “b” and “c” is what Scientology evolved into. But definition “a” is the one that fits the original philosophy that underlies the tech still being applied successfully by many people.

    In fact, even the tech and benefits you received in the CoS you yourself have raved about. It’s the culture that evolved – in other words the ideology as defined in “b” and “c” – that you criticize, if I’ve understood you correctly.

    1. Even definition a) fits the bill nicely. Even that definition has the liability of limiting thought. That realization in itself contains much freedom to be had.

      1. Buddhism and Taoism, for example, both have a system of concepts, as do many other philosophies and practices, if not all of them – even those such as anarchy. And, as with Scientology, many people have attested to having gained freedom through those systems, rather than lost or lessened it. The way I get it is that a system is helpful for people in order to get them to a level where they no longer need that system. The structure itself was what got them to where they no longer needed structure.

          1. Yes, as you said not long ago…a belief can inspire…even up to that point that the person
            realizes that it is HE who is putting SPIRIT into the belief, into the illusion….in which instant the person finds himself as the only value itself, which is the SPIRIT itself…and it is true
            for each being….when the person sees it, the illusionary duality of the ME and YOU is gone….the same LOVE source is manifesting IT-SELF in different ways…

          2. Geir
            You said earlier, don’t remember precisely, that OT-s getting into ‘trouble’ wished, created, postulated….getting into trouble, otherwise it wouldn’t happen. Do you still think that?

        1. Marildi
          ‘the structure itself was what got them to where they no longer NEEDED structure’
          Perfectly said. Thought wants to capture the ‘moment’…doesn’t want it to ‘go away’ because of like-dislike…thought can come in a pattern, structure. Yes, for some people it is ‘helpful’ to
          see that ‘structure’ as such exists. Especially for those who use the analytical mind at a high
          level.

    2. Adopting any ideology or belief system has its advantages and its disadvantages. Unfortunately, its advantages lead to its disadvantages.

      So, just like doing heroin, a belief system is great at first. Then, not so much.

      Krishnamurti said that “truth is a pathless land”. I have now learned the lessons which prompted him to say this.

      This is the greatest lesson that I learned from having been a Scientologist.

      Alanzo

        1. By always picking and choosing from many different sources and depending on yourself to decide which idea is right and which is wrong.

          By never allowing anyone else to define you for you, or the universe you live in for you.

          And by recognizing any ideology like a panther in a tree, and running as far and as fast away from it as absolutely possible.

          Ideologies are not necessary at any stage of one’s spiritual path. They are the ultimate trap.

          Alanzo

          1. Alanzo
            Huh…I wish you were here now. There is so MUCH in what you are saying. Piece by piece…
            I have an appointment now but sure will go on with this talk.

          2. Alanzo
            I have questions. One at a time. If you are in.
            ‘By always picking and choosing from many different sources and depending on yourself to
            decide which idea is right and which is wrong’. How do you mean it, can you elaborate it a little, also, can you give an example?

            1. Valkov
              Marildi: Don’t forget that karma also relates to the first dynamic and how you ‘spend’ YOURSELF. And whether the other guy is sincerely interested and capable of a com cycle that has integrity in the determining factor of ‘self’ ethically spent’.
              Its truth has just shocked me recently. The key in it is ‘capable’ as related to ‘energy’. One can come up with the most brilliant ideas, can be logical, can have a high level of intellect,
              even perhaps a ‘clear mind’, still very ‘solid’ emotionally, that is the ’emotional body’ is charged. I have been quite ‘uncharged’ for some time. Kind of ‘free and present’. Able to
              almost instantly ‘in-Spire’ and ‘get’ people ‘up’ to resonate with ‘me’. What I have noticed is that this ‘up’ lasted for them for some time. But – and here is the shocking truth – because of
              their own uninspected ‘energy’ and ‘thoughts’, also the ‘environment’, the ‘relationships’ ( ! !) they had, the actual change in ‘rise’ of tone which remained stable was little. That is a person truely has a ‘chronic’ emotional resonance, which can be independent of the ‘mind’.
              I would say, this is the ‘true’ tone of the being….on the outer tone scale.
              I didn’t understand it as experience when I studied it. Since ‘awakening’ it has been mostly observations….several things have become clear, in which Ron was right.
              In short: the key is to help change the ‘energy’ level of the person and his ability to ‘produce and handle’ energy. In ALL ‘forms’ (wavelenghts). Until the person sees the truth in it, it can be lots of ‘coms’.

            2. Marianne, I love to read your posts because I really get that your knowingness is from direct experience – the most reliable kind of knowledge.

              “Logic is the use of data to produce knowingness; as such it is very junior to knowing
              something by being it.” (Scn 8-8008)

              You wrote: “That is a person truly has a ‘chronic’ emotional resonance, which can be independent of the ‘mind’. I would say, this is the ‘true’ tone of the being….on the outer tone scale.”

              I have had the idea that LRH discovered chronic tones by direct experience also. One question – what did you mean by the OUTER tone scale?

            3. LOL, I just figured that out and was about to ask you if that was what you meant, and to give you this other quote from 8-8008:

              “The auditor will very often find an individual who is intensely logical and quite brilliant who is yet very difficult to process. This person has agreed with the MEST universe to such a degree that his association has assumed the proportions of near-solidity; the facsimiles and ridges of this individual have become much too solid and are consequently quite difficult to process. This condition of solidity may refer only to the body of the preclear which itself is old, and it may be found that the thetan — the preclear himself — is quite vital and capable of wide differentiation, but that this differentiation is being grossly limited by the ridges and facsimiles which surround the body. Such bodies have a heavy appearance. It requires an enormously powerful thetan to handle them in spite of the solidity of the ridges surrounding the body.”

            4. Marildi
              There is surely something here, which I cannot yet see clearly but has significance concerning OTs-s, illnesses, deaths. The theta-body (in the east the emotional body, the heart). The mind can be clear, also the physical body healthy, when the being gets suddenly shocked – a kind of big loss in the emotional body of the ‘person’, which is, in my experience, connected to the emotional field of all other beings….see ‘compassion’, Greg
              Braden video. I don’t know how ‘high’ one can get on the ‘outer’ ‘thetan’ scale by auditing.
              To audit the ‘mind’ may not be enough. A shock in the emotional body can affect the physical body too. What do you say to this?

            5. Marianne, I see it the same way you do on all you said.

              As for “I don’t know how ‘high’ one can get on the ‘outer’ ‘thetan’ scale by auditing”, in the chapter about responsibility in Science of Survival, LRH lists out how a fully responsible person would act on each of the dynamics – and as regards the 7th dynamic, he simply says:

              “He may or may not have some consideration in the direction of theta, this depending upon his own advancement.”

              My understanding of that makes me think that the level of spiritual advancement a person is already at when he begins in Scientology is what determines how high auditing will take him. He may already have made some advancement as a thetan this lifetime, before Scn – or in earlier lifetimes, and thus starts out at a relatively higher level. That’s the beauty of the tech, to my understanding – it relates to anybody at their own level and brings them up from that point.

              Here’s another great passage I found for you, in the chapter on Secondary Engrams:

              “The amount of free theta with which an individual is endowed is enormously important. The amount of free theta has a great deal to do with the persistence or reasoning force of the individual along any course. This would be the volume of a person. The quality of a person would be more a structural thing. To make this clearer, a person may have an enormous volume of endowed theta, and yet not have the structure with which to be intelligent. Or he may have a quality index which is very high and yet not have sufficient endowment of theta to execute the plans which he can conceive… Aberration, considered as pitch or tone, is theoretically independent of quality (structure, probably) and volume (theta endowment). The factors of quality and volume would account in part for the individual differences which may be found in aberrated persons at similar levels of the tone scale.”

              So besides “pitch” (tone level), there is volume and quality. Interesting, isn’t it!

            6. Marildi
              It is true that considerations are ‘higher order’ than mest.

              But it’s also true that theta has peculiar qualities and ‘abilities’. Which may be even ‘higher order’ than considerations themselves. Beyond considerations.

              There may be a ‘layer’ of theta beings in that ‘order’ ‘who’ don’t operate by considerations.
              I can’t see it but kind of ‘know’ it.

          3. Al, I don’t disagree with what you are saying here, but I would like to point out that what you are expressing here is in itself, a point-by-point ideology. The problem is not with your points, but that all these points you make can become adopted as a set of doctrinaire beliefs, enforced, worshipped, etc. And that is the problem. Ideologies are inevitable. It is what a person does with any ideology that can become a problem.

            1. Wait a minute. I thought that you did not know what an ideology was, and that “belief system” could be a term for anything.

              And now you say ideologies are “inevitable”?

              Ideologies are not “inevitable”. Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Hubbard did not just wake up one day with all these followers all around them. They all worked very hard for years to create their mental cages for their followers. Very hard.

              And they knew exactly what they were doing.

              And they did it all on purpose.

              If ideologies are all inevitable, then we would not be seeing the dispersal of Scientologists – going every which way – after they leave the Church.

              Maybe a person can hop from one ideology to another, but the creation of an ideology is far from inevitable.

              Alanzo

            2. OK Al, perhaps your OP made it clear to me what you mean by ‘ideology’, so now I understand what I did not understand before. Is that allowed? This focus on what I do or do not understand seems like an attempt at diversion, a focus away from the central content and meaning of my post. Are you stalling while you search for a way to make me wrong? Why not just respond to what I posted?

              And ‘ideology’ is completely inevitable because any ‘culture’ is largely a matrix for transmitting ideology. One cannot be born human and grow up in a society without being inculcated with an ideology. You grew up being taught lessons of right and wrong by your parents, your schools, your churches, etc. The process of ‘bringing up a child’ is largely a process of instilling ideology.

              Your objections to ‘scientology’ are simply ideological objections. Perhaps you are not actually seeing scientology as it is? Perhaps you are seeing it through the filters of the ideological values you were raised with? Perhaps a person from a different cultural background, say Chinese or Japanese, would see it differently than you do?

            3. So now you think that an ideology is the same as a culture?

              Aren’t you just A=Aing here in order to justify Scientology as an ideology?

              Isn’t this another one of your “Sure, as a Scientologist I am an ideologue – EVERYONE IS AN IDEOLOGUE!” arguments?

              I think it is.

              An ideology is a very specific thing. It is not a culture, nor is it what makes you a member of the wider society you grew up in. An ideology, especially an ideology like Scientology or Nazism or Communism, is a very specific thing.

              Yes there are similarities, but being a Scientologist, or a Nazi, is NOT the same as being an American.

              And being an ideologue is not the same as NOT being one.

              Alanzo

            4. Al,

              As I suspected and predicted, you were just stalling for time to think of how you would make me wrong. Nice straw man you have put up there, to respond to. Too bad it has nothing to do with who I am or what I think, otherwise you could have just responded to the meaning and content of my post about ideologies, instead of adhomming what I posted. But then, that is one of your specialties.

              And yes, I do think being an ‘American’ has lots of ideological underpinnings. Most every other nationality that has had contact with Americans is well aware of it. Notice I am not saying there is anything wrong with being ‘American’; why would you be defensive about it? It seems some stable datum of yours is threatened by this discussion?

              I’m actually quite prepared to drop this mode of interacting with you, but I don’t think you would be able to do so. I believe you feel too much animosity towards me. I am tired of posting something straightforward, only to have you make it wrong as a matter of policy on your part.

              We could perhaps start by agreeing to one of the following: 1. We have somewhat different ideas and definitions of some subjects, like ‘ideology’, and both of our ideas have validity, or 2., you are a moron.

              Which would you prefer to agree to?

              To help you decide, here are some standard American definitions of ‘ideology’ from a couple of different dictionaries:

              i·de·ol·o·gy

              1. The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.
              2. A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other system.

              ideology [ˌaɪdɪˈɒlədʒɪ]

              1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a body of ideas that reflects the beliefs and interests of a nation, political system, etc. and underlies political action
              2. (Philosophy) Philosophy Sociol the set of beliefs by which a group or society orders reality so as to render it intelligible
              3. speculation that is imaginary or visionary
              4. (Philosophy) the study of the nature and origin of ideas

            5. Val, my response to so many of your posts is this: Truth and insight have such an aesthetic flow! I guess that’s because the aesthetic wavelength being so high is close to Basic Truth (theta). Simply put, you speak out from your sense of truth, whether brutal or subtle. And you’re funny too! 🙂

            6. marildi, thanks for trying to put a nice gloss on my posts to Al, but I am tired of his b.s. towards me. This has a history going back about 4 years. If he wants to call a truce and respond to the content of my posts, fine, but he likes his own ‘zingers’ too much.

              He has an overweening desire/need to be praised, and it drives him berserk to be criticized and disagreed with. Not a good characteristic for a ‘critic’! Being right becomes to important.

              I guess knowing that, I really should just praise him for his better posts and leave the rest alone. Forget actually having a discussion of any content, except to call out “Good boy!” every once in a while, and let him continue to believe he is just the one and only smartest most perceptive guy around.

              I really do wish I had ‘known better’ 4 years ago, but I didn’t and here we are today……

            7. Val, your posts don’t need a “gloss” put on them. You have an excellent ability to rationally size up what is presented to you and then equally well articulate your insights with regard to it. I just hope your earnest efforts at true and honest discussion aren’t being wasted and using up your vitality for nothing.

              I too finally got tired of the b.s. of some exchanges and decided it’s never going to come to anything but beating my head against a brick wall. Here’s a quote that has often come to mind for myself and you too:

              “When we say ‘Life’ we mean understanding, and when we say ‘understanding’ we mean affinity, reality and communication…Because life is understanding it attempts to understand. When it faces the incomprehensible it feels balked and baffled.” (Dn 55!)

            8. Thanks marildi. I honestly don’t know why I do waste my time and energy, as it does take energy. It is like a habit – read some posts, give Al a kick in the shins, go play some cards…. I’m just racking up bad karma for myself.

            9. Truthfully, Val, I’m always gratified when you set things straight, but that’s just my own selfish consideration. I’m not sure at all if it’s worth the effort required of you. I’m a big believer in using ARC but who wants to go into ARC with “incomprehensibility” (as in that quote). Or with hostility. When someone continues to repeat something (like “your religion”) when you’ve already said was not the case, you have to wonder about their intentions.

              So now, when I spot hostility, for example, as the basic intention, I choose the Code of Honor as the applicable principle. Don’t forget that karma also relates to the first dynamic and how you “spend” YOURSELF. And whether the other guy is sincerely interested in and capable of a comm cycle that has integrity is the determining factor of “self ethically spent”. I’m glad you’re letting Alanzo know what is needed and wanted from your side, and I hope it turns out that he likes the change of op basis too. The bottom line is always intention.

            10. Valkov
              ‘it is what a person does with an ideology that can become a problem’ + 1
              also, with a thought, with an emotion, with……….

            11. So you are saying that an ideology is the same as a culture.

              And therefore being a Scientologist is the same as being an American.

              And being an ideologue is the same as NOT being an ideologue.

              Way to go, Val.

              Your Scientology logic is clear as ever.

              Alanzo

            12. Al, as far as I can tell, your post is entirely ‘straw man’.

              Al> “So you are saying that an ideology is the same as a culture.” straw man

              “And therefore being a Scientologist is the same as being an American.” straw man

              “And being an ideologue is the same as NOT being an ideologue” straw man

              Way to go, Val.

              “Your Scientology logic is clear as ever.” Ad hom

              Please show me, Al, where I posted any of what you have me saying.

              Perhaps Bad Valkov has been sneaking around behind me posting those kind of statements, because I certainly haven’t posted a single one of them?

            13. All right, Val. I’ll address your point directly and leave the personal remarks and outright abuse in your post alone.

              Val wrote:

              Al,

              As I suspected and predicted, you were just stalling for time to think of how you would make me wrong. Nice straw man you have put up there, to respond to. Too bad it has nothing to do with who I am or what I think, otherwise you could have just responded to the meaning and content of my post about ideologies, instead of adhomming what I posted. But then, that is one of your specialties.

              Here, you have spent a paragraph not presenting an argument. Only personal remarks and speculations as to what is going on in my mind.

              And yes, I do think being an ‘American’ has lots of ideological underpinnings. Most every other nationality that has had contact with Americans is well aware of it.

              This is your argument. “being an American has lots of ideological underpinnings”. For evidence supporting your argument, you present the generality that “Most every other nationality that has had contact with Americans is well aware of it.”

              Then you start in with more taunts as to my own state of mind”

              Notice I am not saying there is anything wrong with being ‘American’; why would you be defensive about it? It seems some stable datum of yours is threatened by this discussion?

              Then we find no argument again, but now you are back to personal remarks about me and my state of mind:

              I’m actually quite prepared to drop this mode of interacting with you, but I don’t think you would be able to do so. I believe you feel too much animosity towards me. I am tired of posting something straightforward, only to have you make it wrong as a matter of policy on your part.

              Then you get abusive, again.

              We could perhaps start by agreeing to one of the following: 1. We have somewhat different ideas and definitions of some subjects, like ‘ideology’, and both of our ideas have validity, or 2., you are a moron.

              Which would you prefer to agree to? To help you decide,…

              Now, after three paragraphs of personal remarks to me, and calling me a moron again (LOL!) you finally present more evidence for your argument that “being an American has lots of ideological underpinnings”

              here are some standard American definitions of ‘ideology’ from a couple of different dictionaries:

              i·de·ol·o·gy

              1. The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.
              2. A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other system.

              ideology [ˌaɪdɪˈɒlədʒɪ]

              1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a body of ideas that reflects the beliefs and interests of a nation, political system, etc. and underlies political action
              2. (Philosophy) Philosophy Sociol the set of beliefs by which a group or society orders reality so as to render it intelligible
              3. speculation that is imaginary or visionary
              4. (Philosophy) the study of the nature and origin of ideas

              So, being an American has lots of ideological underpinnings.

              An “underpinning” is defined as

              Noun
              1. A solid foundation laid below ground level to support or strengthen a building.
              2. A set of ideas, motives, or devices that justify or form the basis for something: “the theoretical underpinning for free-market economics”.

              So you are saying that “ideological underpinnings form the basis for being an American”.

              Yet what I am saying is that Scientology is an ideology.

              Apparently then, your latest statement only intimated that being an American is the same as being a Scientologist. You moved the goal posts of your argument back once I pointed out that being an American was not the same as being a Scientologist, and that an ideology like Communism, Nazism and Scientology is not the same as a culture.

              And, as we can see, you surrounded your argument that “being an American has lots of ideological underpinnings” with abusive and personal remarks towards me.

              All right Valkov.

              Being an American has lots of ideological underpinnings.

              That truly is a brilliant statement. Well done.

              But why all the insults and personal remarks that go along with it?

              Alanzo

            14. Well Al, why didn’t you avoid all the froo-fraw and just acknowledge from the start that being ‘American’ involved elements of ideology?

              As for the rest of it, have you ever referred to my ‘state of mind’ as being that of a ‘scientologist’, and used that as a basis for criticizing or attacking a post of mine?

              If so, why is it OK for you to do it, but not OK for me to do it?

              Are not your protests about my posting behavior rather pot/kettle?

            15. And this post by Valkov is almost all personal to me, and does not address the OP, or any other subject than me, my perceived likes and my perceived proclivities – all in a very personal and nasty way. All these things that are considered rude and offensive on this blog:

              marildi, thanks for trying to put a nice gloss on my posts to Al, but I am tired of his b.s. towards me. This has a history going back about 4 years. If he wants to call a truce and respond to the content of my posts, fine, but he likes his own ‘zingers’ too much.

              He has an overweening desire/need to be praised, and it drives him berserk to be criticized and disagreed with. Not a good characteristic for a ‘critic’! Being right becomes to important.

              I guess knowing that, I really should just praise him for his better posts and leave the rest alone. Forget actually having a discussion of any content, except to call out “Good boy!” every once in a while, and let him continue to believe he is just the one and only smartest most perceptive guy around.

              I really do wish I had ‘known better’ 4 years ago, but I didn’t and here we are today……

              The reason, Valkov, that you must constantly use ad hom toward me, as above, is that your religion, Scientology, is not defensible.

              If I say that L Ron Hubbard lied about his war record for 36 years straight, never once correcting his lies and always using these lies to sell Dianetics and Scientology to people” you must respond with a personal remark about me, because you can not defend your Founder’s lying.

              If I say that Hubbard lied about the state of Clear in DMSMH, and about having already produced people who were clear per his own characteristics of Clear in DMSMH, then you must call me a “moron” and “dumb as a brick” because Hubbard did lie about these things and there is no way for you to defend it.

              So Valkov, your problem is not me, or what I write.

              Your problem is that you are trying to defend the indefensible.

              And when you stop doing that, your life will be much more happy and free.

              Really.

              Not kidding.

              I’ve been there. I have tried to defend Scientology on the Internet. It can’t be defended. It can not stand up to scrutiny.

              That is your problem.

              Not me.

              Alanzo

            16. Whatever Al. I suggest you parse your own posts for adhom and strawman. You do realize that characterizing my statements as being due, for instance, to ‘scientology is his religion’, instead of simply responding to my specific statements, is a strawman and sometimes adhom in itself? It is a simple and mindless way to devalue or dismiss my posts, a cheap debate tactic.

              As far as ‘personal’, it seems to me you take my posts very personally and respond to them personally. At this point it is personal and will continue to be until you decide to change it by abstaining from trying to discredit my posts as the products of a scientology-disabled mind. When you grant me the respect you grant others, I will reciprocate. Until then, no respect dude. Very personally, no respect.

              I actually don’t come here to ‘debate’ anything; you do. You have an agenda; it is apparently to discredit LRH and Scientology across the board. I don’t have much experience with it, but I had 3 good auditors and a good Purif supe and a couple of good course supes in my life who all did me a lot of good. So I will continue to give them credit for that. And as far as I know, they were following a program laid out by LRH, so I will continue to give him credit for that.

              If you can’t live with that, then, well, what’s your alternative ? 🙂

            17. Al, it just struck me that the post you are referencing was not addressed to you, nor was it commenting on any of your specific posts!

              It was indeed a personal aside to marildi about, indeed, your ‘person’, how I see your ‘personality’ and stuff like that.

              Given that context, I notice that you do not deny possessing any of the attributes I attributed to you in the post. Why not?

              Is it because you simply could not deny the truth of what I posted about you?

              And since scientology is not my ‘religion’, and I do not worship LRH, and have never said most of the things you like to claim I said, most of the rest of your post is strawman and it boils down to you not being able to wrap your wits around the concept that anyone could dislike anything about you.

              Or perhaps you have an overwhelming need for motivators? Not that I care, I am happy to provide you with as many as you might wish for, no questions asked.

            18. Val to Al; “Until then, no respect dude. Very personally, no respect.”

              Me: I would advise against just that on my blog.

            19. Geir, don’t just go by the words of frustration on this one post. If you read Valkov’s last several posts you’ll see his actual intent. which is an earnest attempt to change the quality of exchanges between him and Al and to have them be mutually respectful .

            20. No problem Geir. I have posted several times now I am tired of the bickering and am tired of abusing Al and calling him a moron, etc. I can certainly frame my posts more neutrally; however I don’t believe at this point that Al can stop from his end. After all, deprecation and abuse of those he sees as ‘scientologists’ is a deeply embedded part of his shtick. What will he do if he can’t post his ‘famous’ zingers?

              So what I said about not respecting him is a datum I wanted him to have, just in case he thought I was kidding or something. It does not mean I have a plan to continue abusing him publicly; I in fact look for aspects of Al to respect and admire, and I was for instance quite relieved to find Chris validating some of Al’s views of ‘scientology’ as represented by the existing Church organizations. I think it is very respectable that Al fought his way out of the cultic mindset; I never had to do that to that degree because I was never that much involved with it. Even so I recognize how entrapping the scientology culture can be. A person WANTS the promo and stated ideals to be true; when the org proves out to be the reverse of what was expected and in fact nuts, it is a great disillusionment. However I believe that at this time, Al literally CAN’T HAVE me agreeing with him.

              That’s enough for now. However I have identified what is for me the ‘basic’ on the situation with Al, and I appreciate your letting me have free reign to post, which has allowed me reach this point. I may make a post about this another time.

            21. Thanks Valkov. Thank you for empathizing with the difficulty that a person can have realigning every frickin’ molecule of his life’s orientation after a cult indoctrination. I have routinely been asked whether Scientology helped me. I want to try and succinctly express how I view this today. Scientology helped me become a very good Scientologist. What I’ve done since then has helped me more. My activities since beginning my decompression in 2005 helped me more along the purpose and reasons why I wanted to participate in Scientology beginning in 1977.

              I’ve recommended to you on more than one occasion to participate in Scientology. This may have come across as snide, but I assure it was not. The reason I recommended you do Scientology is that because of our writing here together I felt that you held out hope for unmet expectations from Scientology. There’s only one way to reconcile that to ourselves and that is to walk that path that we yearned for. Walk it and learn. That is what I did.

              I first began by locating an independent Scientologist who might help me. Dialing that phone, at that moment in my life, was the most excruciatingly knowing overt act I have ever committed. Never had I committed a worse act of treachery within my memory. What tipped the scale in my mind was the intolerable level of cognitive dissonance that I was experiencing by the grossly inconsistent treatment that I had been and was receiving. Pavlov’s dogs did not have a worse experience than I trying to reconcile my life within the Sea Org. Anyway, I found an auditor and C/S and bought some hours and jumped in. I got my out-interiorization repaired; my out-list repaired, security check repaired, some other actions which I kind of forget since it’s been so long; then began a long program of false data stripping and education. Finally, my next action would have been OT levels so with the encouragement of Elizabeth Hamre, I just began. It was to be honest, kind of a snap and very empowering.

              But then this emergence happened where I came full circle to a similar state of consciousness and awareness and curiosity and of youth to where I was when I began Scientology. WTF? There is an old saw in the Baptist Church that goes like this, “The Holy Spirit is the Great Comforter, and if’n you are already comfortable, he’ll make you uncomfortable so’s he can comfort you!” Well that comes to mind when I want to relate my experience with Scientology. I was doing fine, and curious when I was pitched about doing better. The very first action on the very first day in Scientology was to have my OCA invalidated and read to me like a bad Gypsy fortune teller, “You see here where this graph is all above this dark line? Well, this shows a glib OCA which means that you are happy only on the outside but really crying for help on the inside.”

              So long story shorter, I bought in and began a decades long detour for me on the Road to Freedom. That’s how I view it, an unnecessary and detrimental education in What Not To Audit. And yet, at the beginning of the ending of this story, what else was I supposed to do but finish the pilgrimage I had begun?

            22. OK Chris, that’s a little closer but the whole story kind of floats in time, which for me is a problem. I never liked those kind of movies much, where I couldn’t sort out the timeline. What yours expresses to me is the old saying, “Wherever you go, well, there you are.”

              Anyway, Thanks, and keep on keeping on I guess. The way you tell it, reminds me of taking an LSD trip. Reality can get broken into a million pieces and what you see can be totally ‘other’. When you come down from the trip you come back to the same reality you left behind for awhile, but it is somehow not the same and some how unrecognizable, because neither are you quite the same or quite as recognizable. This can be a good thing or a bad thing. If you don’t have a prior construct in place that can help you explain what happened, you could be in trouble. Or not. Psychedelics are pretty wildly unpredictable, and I do see Scientology processes as very analogous to psychedelics. They are non-drug psychedelics. LRH did kinda warn us, “May you never be the same again”, and he wasn’t kidding.

              In using psychedelics, back in the day, the catechism or mantra was, you needed “set and setting” both to be good and right, or you could have a real bad trip.

              Unfortunately the way I see it, the CoS as a whole has become a real bad ‘set and setting’ in which to be exposed to mind-altering procedures. The Sea Org was a bad setting for it from the start, I could see that even in 1972-1973, by it’s impact on the field. They were already into the space opera ‘mellerdrammer’ of it all.

              This is I guess what virtually no-one today understands, that the ‘scientology’ I see in my mind’s eye is absent all those elements. The methods of scientology ought never to be used to make people into ‘good scientologists’, or any kind of ‘scientologists’. I just can’t seem to get this idea across. That is a debasement of scientology. If LRH debased it, oh well, that’s his business and maybe why he told Sarge he had failed and wanted to die. I’m sure by then he could see it wasn’t really working out for the best.

              So if the bad ‘setting’ is removed, what is left? I have a pretty clear concept of this, but apparently it is not shared by very many today. To get it, one really has to have a strong sense of the sacred. A word that is embarrassing to a lot of people these days.

              Neti neti.

            23. Valkov: “Wherever you go, well, there you are.”

              Chris: I don’t expect to be cheered and only hope not to be jeered when I tell you “This is the tautological universe.” The solution is to play the game. And in my opinion, this what “we were made for.” Yes, made for. Looking too closely at the players can have the effect of causing the entire game to look like one big overblown cliche’ with feet showing from under the curtain. The solution for as far as I can see is to teach and practice sportsmanship and play.

            24. Valkov: This is I guess what virtually no-one today understands, that the ‘scientology’ I see in my mind’s eye is absent all those elements.

              Chris: Oh, I get it. The pivotal point of this conversation, is do you believe that I know what you are talking about?

            25. Valkov: This is I guess what virtually no-one today understands, that the ‘scientology’ I see in my mind’s eye is absent all those elements.

              Chris: And secondly, do you understand that I’m saying that Scientology is a be all and end all construct that defines itself completely. It poses both the self fulfilling problem and the self fulfilling solution to the problem? Outside Scientology, there is no model of the world precisely like Scientology. This should hold true for any theory of everything ideologies, and I now operate on the basis that there is an outside.

          4. [The] problem is that you are trying to defend the indefensible.

            Ahhhhh . . . clink . . . the penny drops. Thank you. I’ve read this before, of course, but until your meticulous dissection of this exchange, I hadn’t quite grasped its significance. For a while now I have pondered upon why conversations about Scientology with Scientologists inevitably devolve into either their departure from dialogue or application of ad hom. My assumption was that the pattern stemmed from the “always attack, never defend . . . anyone who criticises has crimes” doctrine. I had extrapolated a whole thesis on this: something along the lines that Scientology relies on confusing the objective with the subjective and, thus, becomes so much a part of the person that any criticism of the subject is perceived by a Scientologist as criticism of their person which, naturally, stimulates the fight/flight response. But, of course, Scientology is indefensible when subject to even entry-level logic. In order to bolster the cognitive dissonance, initial sophistry presents a Scientologist with an initial dodge but must, eventually, reduce to blatant fallacy. Or withdrawal.

            (Caveat: the word “Scientologist” can be substituted for any ideologue, pretty much, in my experience. And, yes, guilty myself. From time to time)

            While I’m sure it must be tiresome for you to engage with these tactics, rest assured that the gallery appreciates your efforts. Here . . . have some caek.

            Thank you also for your comment on ideology. My immediate take-away from your thoughts is a picture (mental image LOL) of the universe watching a person looking at a portion of it through a fixed telescope. The analogy, of course, being that the telescope is the ideology. It can see deep and far into the universe, but glimpse only a speck. The further the telescope can reach, the the more the person thinks they can see, yet, in fact, the less of the whole is being perceived. A bit clumsy, I know; your comment is still percolating through my shock absorber.

            1. Thanks, Crepuscule.

              I think a many of the factors you lay out are also true.

              “Always attack, never defend” was Hubbard’s teaching to Scientologists because he knew that Scientology could not be defended, but he did not want to admit that to them.

              He actually said “the defense of anything in untenable”. This is a false statement. If someone disputes a fact, you can easily defend it by showing the evidence for the fact. It is totally tenable to defend something that is defensible.

              But Hubbard, knowing that he lied, knowing that he changed his story and contradicted himself so many times, gave Scientologists a tactic to employ when a criticism of Scientology was made which also acted as a thought-stopping mechanism for them, so they would move their attention off of the criticism of Scientology, and onto the critic himself.

              It killed two birds with one stone, but it left the Scientologist holding the bag, and having to defend the indefensible.

              It is amazing how many years a person can continue to defend the indefensible, never realizing that this is what they are doing.

              Alanzo

            2. Alanzo: It killed two birds with one stone, but it left the Scientologist holding the bag, and having to defend the indefensible.

              DeE: Nice sum up post on that.

            3. Alanzo
              Bloody hell! YOU, the real YOU cannot be attacked, harmed! Only your ego, your false personality, your filter! Of course Valkov is attacking that, giving you a good chance for a breakthrough, for a collapse! You are close or at that point! You and I started a talk…so,
              come on, talk to me. Watch for the very first consideration that comes to the mind after this….

            4. Geir
              You will get a little too! ‘Cool analogy with the telescope. I will use it when needed’
              Why do you need a telescope when YOU can watch the whole panorama without that? And TALK about that! YOU talk…why do you need an analogy? What is your belief ‘as needed’
              based on? What is the evaluation there?

            5. Crep: The further the telescope can reach, the the more the person thinks they can see, yet, in fact, the less of the whole is being perceived. A bit clumsy, I know; your comment is still percolating through my shock absorber.

              Chris: Excellent.

            6. Geir
              ‘You need to get yourself a telescope”. Great! Need to… Who did you agree with that the telescope would do the looking for you?

            7. Crepuscule: The analogy, of course, being that the telescope is the ideology. It can see deep and far into the universe, but glimpse only a speck. The further the telescope can reach, the the more the person thinks they can see, yet, in fact, the less of the whole is being perceived.

              DeE: Like your post and analogy 🙂

            8. Cool telescope. Not unlike the ‘blind men and the elephant’ analogy. Microscope/macroscope, anyone?

              Haven’t I seen you posting on ESMB?

            9. Chris :But then this emergence happened where I came full circle to a similar state of consciousness and awareness and curiosity and of youth to where I was when I began Scientology. WTF?

              Sound similar to OT8, wow! 🙂

          1. Freedom is really nothing. It’s fuck it. It’s chill. And one can lean that by jumping hoops, doing yoga or the RPF. But, as Alan Watts would say, one can instead decide to just “get off it”. Whatever you think will work, will work. But of course, the less baggage and constriction you amass on the way, the easier it will be. Hence I wouldn’t recommend the RPF.

            1. Did you know that 25 years ago? Also, it’s not only about ‘freedom’. For me it’s also about ‘spiritual’ experiences which I didn’t have while doing gymnastics, yoga ( little), playing tennis or doing research in linguistics. True, experiences come and go. Conciousness has ‘layers’…it’s worth…hm. a little “journey”. How do you see it?

            2. Try again please.

              Contrary to what I seem to be reading here, all roads do not lead to Rome. One doesn’t fix his car by working on his toaster, or heal his broken leg by washing his hair. A does not equal A does not equal A.

              You are free to choose the road to Rome, but it will not take you to Reykjavik. Either journey may be pleasant and enlightening, but they are not the same destination. If you don’t care where you will end up, then just roll some dice and start walking.

            3. @Val, It seems that most people care where they end up, however, very many people either do not end up there or once there are disappointed. This is something to look at.

            4. Chris, I guess it wasn’t obvious from where it got posted, but my post was to Geir, for equating “jumping hoops, doing yoga, or the RPF”.

              So tell me, is ‘freedom’ quantifiable?

            5. Valkov: So tell me, is ‘freedom’ quantifiable?

              Chris: That’s an excellent question. It seems to me the answer is yes. Sometimes both the barrier and the freedom are defined by the same quantity, such as: 4 each x 15 minute quarters = full game. Or, you have one hour to complete the test. Or, you are free to fight anywhere within the confines of this arena.

            6. Geir
              ‘Freedom is really nothing. It’s fuck it. It’s chill.’ NO. Realizing that one=chill in the ‘core’ (as the truth of one’s being) is just the ‘first step’. No ‘filter’. The next ‘step’ is to live life without any personal control for the first time. Here is where the factually ‘experience’ anything enters the picture. Some little, latent fragments of the filter, the ego can still be there for some time, though. I don’t know how you see this.

        1. Valkov: Or do you feel the price you paid is too high?

          Chris: 1. Useful parts of the lessons were what happens to me when I give over my determinism over to a cult. 2. Price was too high. Still paying.

          1. Chris: Al, “would you not, then, wish for others to learn this lesson also? Or do you feel the price you paid is too high?
            Valkov: Or do you feel the price you paid is too high?

            Chris: 2. …. Price was too high.

            Made me think of an answer to wishing others to learn this lesson?
            If I was responsible for being interested in some fabulous bubbly water and started drinking it, etc. and later found it to be somewhat poisonous and I had wasted a lot of time. It would be unethical of me to help another find or lead them to that water even if it quenched his thirst a little, as did mine. Price too high, right! 🙂

            1. I find it interesting that none of the replies so far have been with regard to the realm of auditing or training such as TRs, and Bridge steps specifically, which was really what my question is about, as I consider those to be the heart of Scientology I take it that neither Chris, nor Al, nor deE, got any gain, benefit or insight from partaking in those activities.

              I seem to see a careful avoidance of that aspect of the subject, however.

              If you did some of those activities and got nothing out of any of your auditing or training, why not just say so?

              Those are, to me, “Scientology”, and would be the only parts of the subject that potentially have any value.

              It was long ago, but I had perhaps 3 good auditors who delivered some auditing to me, 2 or 3 good Course supes, and a good Purif I/C each of whom did me some good along the way. I believe it is because they delivered the services conscientiously according to the directions/parameters laid down by LRH. I don’t mind crediting them for what they did for me, and also crediting LRH for laying out how to do the procedures in the first place.

              If all you can come up with in reply is what appears to you to be a good and clever ‘zinger’, don’t bother as far as I’m concerned. Of course you can go ahead and post it for whatever audience you think you have out there for it.

            2. I’ve written to this preemptively, somewhere . . . here.

              For me, the part that is difficult to express succinctly is how the overridingly largest lesson learned is how to be mindful of the mental grifters in the world. I think I could better have learned this in say a one semester course at the local community college. My father was making a point one time by telling me a joke about a merchant who asked his son to climb a ladder and to put away some merchandise up high on shelf. When the lad finished the father told him, “Jump! I’ll catch you.” Worried, the lad balked, but his father chided, “don’t worry, I’m going to catch you.” Whereupon the boy shrugged and did a swan dive into his father’s arms, only the father dropped his arms, took a step back, and allowed the lad to face-plant on the floor breaking his nose. Dobbing the blood from the boy’s face the father said, “See what I tell you? Don’t trust nobody.” Did this lesson benefit the broken-nosed boy? Maybe, yet somehow this story comes to mind when telling why I think the Scientology price is too high.

            3. Chris: See what I tell you? Don’t trust nobody.” Did this lesson benefit the broken-nosed boy? Maybe, yet somehow this story comes to mind when telling why I think the Scientology price is too high.

              Yeh, trust to stupid or stupid to trust? Good story!

            4. There are other examples of why I think the price of Scientology is too high. Two weeks ago, at my sister-in-law’s 80th birthday party, her daughter, my niece and I were discussing the benefits of athletics for children growing up. I had told her that I thought I wasted too much time on athletics to the detriment of my studies but she said that she owed her outgoing personality to her athletic training. Firstly, she said that she had been a shy girl and introverted by her early and over average growth – she’s 5’10” but for metric users that’s 178 cm. Thanks to our Scandinavian heritage, she is also pretty and blond, kind of like Anette (but I digress.) My niece said that her years of swimming Olympic class swimming had help her overcome her shyness and that since then as an aerobics instructor, that too has helped her overcome her shyness. I consider to be pleasantly outgoing and so do not doubt her claim. So did she miss out on communication training or confronting by not doing Scientology? Maybe, we’ll never know that. One thing’s for sure, her swimming paid for her school and not the other way around.

            5. One last short story came to me one week ago in the form of testimonial from my good friend and roomate from college for in 1973 he and I roomed together in Georgia while selling Bibles door-to-door. His purported reason for doing that job is that he was quite unhappily shy an felt that if he could do a job like that for 3 months that he would overcome his shyness and feel more comfortable talking to people. Well, since that summer he has made his living by talking to people and continues to do quite well right up to the present. He has never done the Comm Course, however, I have never noticed him at a loss for words nor unwilling to listen to my same tired old stories.

              The point of my comments on this is to more fully answer Valkov’s curiosity why I have not previously commented more fully about my own experiences with the Tech. I’ve written and will reiterate that I think the goal of Scientology is to make one a good Scientologist. Any genuine benefits are peripheral, overblown in importance, sporadic, conditioned, impermanent, and involving entirely too high a cost in terms of time spent, money, wear and tear on families, and upon the individual himself — Too high a price.

            6. Chris: Any genuine benefits are peripheral, overblown in importance, sporadic, conditioned, impermanent, and involving entirely too high a cost in terms of time spent, money, wear and tear on families, and upon the individual himself — Too high a price.

              Veery well stated!

            7. Val: Those are, to me, “Scientology”, and would be the only parts of the subject that potentially have any value.

              I enjoyed and had wins in scientology as you mention. And happy for yours. However I would never send anyone to the church and the church is what “scientology” is in reality. The name will take 50 years if still around to make up for it’s bad reputation. Maybe one has to use the term old scientology but it could hardly be an organization, as that is ruined now. I could and do tell some people of wins but not to go into the organization because the losses I will not be responsibility for. If there was some of the same tech called by another name all would be fine, imo. Attitude begets attitude cause mocking is fun.

            8. Thanks to those who replied. My only comment is I had pretty much stopped referring anyone to any CoS by around 1980 or so. It was related for me to the escalating price increases. It has been around 30 years since I referred anyone to the organizations.

              So when I refer to ‘scientology’ I most emphatically do not mean the CoS or any of the associated orgs. They are most emphatically NOT scientology, and do not represent what I mean by scientology, any more than Lamas torturing serfs in Tibet represent “buddhism”, or ‘christian’ authorities burning people at the stake ‘are’ Christianity. They are a failure to represent buddhism or christianity. Those kind of actions lend credence to the concept of a “suppressive” mindset; and by the way, LRH was not the first to bring forward the idea of a generally destructive personality set; it was spoken of in earlier traditions.

              I think just about anyone could do some personal investigation, (I hesitate to mention ‘word-clearing’), of the essential (spelled ESSENTIAL) meaning of the word ‘scientology’.

              “If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you.” The Gospel of Thomas.

            9. Valkov: “If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you.” The Gospel of Thomas.

              Chris: To sort of continue to make more examples, well, this is another good example of a theory of everything ideology… That’s what religion is, isn’t it? A theory of everything which is pushed. In this very apt quote, you have Thomas running the old “Thou shalt fry no other fish.” We can look at this statement and see how it is threatening the followers of the gospel with destruction for holding back any bit of commitment. We see that told over and over when Abraham is told to sacrifice his son, etc.,.

            10. Hey Chris, thanks for the philosophical thoughts. I must say I don’t really get where you’re coming from in some ways. I think there are 2 basic senses for ‘tautology’ – rhetorical and logical, which are quite different.

              However I am thinking that the word that might describe your views is ‘solipsism’.
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism

              Beyond that I have no clue. I interpret the Thomas quote in an entirely apolitical way as far as I know, as a clinical psychological statement. No doubt it can be used politically, as can anything.

              Dr. Seuss wrote about that in his story about ‘The Sneetches’. I see the quote as referring to internal psychological processes entirely.

              I think you generally see ‘religion’ as control mechanisms; I actually do too, but I believe there are ‘inner’ psychological meanings as well that refer to something other than overt behavior. I tend to see these inner meanings as being the ‘more true’ or more worthy of attention, meanings.

              I guess another way of viewing that is that I simply interpret various things in light of my own ideology. but that is so Duh!. Everyone does that.

  2. “No ideology can match the infinity of life, or the infinity of you. The stronger you hold on to an ideology, the smaller, and more fixed, you become.”

    Yo Alanzo, what a fantastic post. My openings just became a bit larger. Thanks 🙂

  3. “No ideology can match the infinity of life, or the infinity of you. The stronger you hold on to an ideology, the smaller, and more fixed, you become”

    I´ll be damned… This is a Super-power Zinger!

    1. If you resist an ideology, you have your attention on it. In that percentage you are part of it.
      You are fuelling it with your own energy.
      The infinity of life includes ideologies as well. If you let them be, they will cease to be, as the nature of life is impermanence.

      1. When I started to blog I said I loved scientology. That part I studied and audited. I feel like repeating it now. The reason for that is very simple. That part I studied and audited is about LIFE. ‘Raw’ life. Ron made it very clear: clear each word which you don’t understand. I did so, ‘beyond’ the conceptual….that is LIFE remained with some ‘abilities’ to function freely, which have always been there but I was not aware of them….that is the true ‘apply’ it….the true apply is actually life’s natural functioning without or with a tool….
        I repeat this too…I have never been and will never be a scientoloGIST, a buddhist, a linguist…..there is some honest, sincere, innocent flow in me which is leading these hands
        to write down these words.

          1. Chris
            ‘Infinite potential-infinite actuality’….Yes.
            ‘There is an underlying dissonance to be found in all thought’. Yes.

            Do you think it is possible to ‘live’ infinite actualities without the underlying dissonance of thought?

            1. Chris
              ‘Not sure what you mean’
              Me: living life without postulating first what/how you live, act…
              Every ‘thought’ comes from past ‘evaluations’….in the HERE there is no thought…just living…..as you wrote in your comment ‘infinite potential-infinite actuality’ – I find it a good definition for the ‘here and now’ where there is no underlying dissonance of thought.

  4. Wow, G. I am flattered. But I wish you would have let me edit it before you put it up. It starts out a little rough with sentences like “Here’s a made-up example of a belief system I will create for you as an example”, but I guess it does get a little better.

    I usually write these before I have my coffee in the morning and am rushing to get ready for my next meeting.

    But oh well.

    All I can think of is “Jefferson Hawkins would never let a sentence like that into one of his posts.

    Alanzo

        1. I’ve come to be mindful of the voluminous faiths that I practice. I find that being mindful helps keep my faiths in balance so that it is helpful to fill the gaps in my understanding rather than becoming detrimental as fixed ideas that I use to do my thinking for me.

      1. Great video, Maria. Here’s another one also with Bruce Lipton together with Tom Campbell. It’s almost an hour long but there’s a 10 minute or so section that is well worth watching if someone doesn’t want to spend an hour.

        Starting at about 30:00, Bruce sums up what he has pursued in biology and what Tom has pursued in physics and how each of them came to the same conclusions about spirituality. Bruce wraps it up with a review of the shortcomings of science, and then Tom talks about the evolution that is now taking place in this universe. He states that this evolution is towards greater organization and more information, which will bring about a higher quality of consciousness and a far better civilization.

          1. I think you’ll like it. One thing I forgot to mention – near the end somewhere, Tom brings up the factor of “intent” and its fundamental importance..

  5. Dammit guys, I intended to write this just before, and then I visited the blog and saw this new post….darnmit for telepathy 😛

    A valid system of belief would that which would show you that your beliefs -including the beliefs of this system itself- are as valid as you think they are, and for as long as you think that they are.

    1. I thought about it the day before yesterday. I was taking part in an internet discussion about this country politics and finally pinned down what pisses me off so much about supporters of the current government of this country:

      They don’t think freely. They’re fixed on their neoliberal dogmas and agressively make wrong everybody who doesn’t agree with them, identifying them with socialists or communists. But I knew the rest. My realization was about their fixedness.

      1. Yeah I understand. The politicians here are plain hypocrites –all of them from the capitalist side to the left-socialcommunist side. The capitalists call themselves democratics….they are with the aristocracy. The left wingers are their left hand. They gather those who intend to react to the aristocracy, so they wont achieve anything (they protest, get teargased, chill, and go back to work)

        1. The motto “in God we trust”. I see this on US money. Money transacts dirty actions of the government hypocrite narcacist takers that contaminates to other areas of departments/compartments, and to different worlds like chain reactions, negatively to all aspects of surviving life, down the food line entities, with many excuses to be, that has nothing to do with God. We are slowly running out of fresh water to drink, land to grow healthy food, speeches, and energy resources. Many of us have been gnawed away like a rat gnaw a hole to become a puppet on a string, and to perform without thinking, or beaten down to apathy, or down to covert hostility to take advantage of the little that is left between the puppets on strings while been entertained by the narcacists. Due to no balance of science and God, it became hypocricy. The debt bubble will one day burst. There won’t be anybody to pay for the multi level debts, made by governments, and made by enterprises, who greedly created it for their own gains.
          Ethics has to be in before things will get better.
          I don’t mind if it will be re-written better.
          .

          1. I am not for any extreme ideology. I am, I guess for a flowing ideology that floats in right direction with best results for the greatest number of ethical people. If the flowing stops then it will be fix ideas. My reality can be changed. I am changing every day. I am looking and observing. I enjoy that!

        2. Spyros,

          Government always follows the people. Not the other way around.

          Government is a manifestation of the collective political will of the people.

          People create the kind of government by their collective thoughts.

          If the people have a problem with the government, all the people have to do is to look in the mirror for the cause.

          I wrote this a while back:

          Here is my article:

          What is wrong with government?

          Why government is getting worse?

          The bible says that all authority is appointed by God.

          There is no authority that is not from God.

          There is no authority that is not from God.

          And this is not just a bible law or a rule that applies to Christians only ,
          it is universal law.

          It is meta physical, psychological law.

          It is a law like the law of gravity. It applies to everyone whether you believe it or not.

          Believing in something does not make it true.

          It is a sin to criticize the government. It makes government more dysfunctional.

          Criticizing politicians causes them to make poor decisions because they pick up or receive all the thoughts of all the people at the same time.

          A politician once said: being a politician is like putting a metal bucket over your head and having everyone bang on it with sticks.

          We must pray for our government leaders and all authority. Pray non ceasingly.

          It must be done now.

          The government will only become good when everybody stops criticizing and prays for them and blesses them and not until then.

          The people always get the kind of government they deserve. No exception.

          The people cause the type of government they get.

          A perfect man can be come president and if people bitch and complain and find fault or fabricate lies and then accuse him of them, that will cause him to make bad decisions.

          If Jesus came to be president, the people would destroy him very quickly.

          When the people bitch and complain they get a bad government and government gets worse.

          When people will pray for their government and leaders and authorities they will get good government.

          Consider this:

          Have you ever been in a critical environment, or the subject of constant or prolonged criticism?

          This could be in a man- woman/ husband-wife relationship, it could be in a work environment, or church management group, or any group environment.

          How did you feel? How do you feel when you got criticized, especially prolonged criticism?

          How efficiently and effectively did you think and make good decisions during that time?

          Likely very poorly. Take an honest look.

          You always wanted to get away into peace and quiet, right? Many people get sick with cancers.

          Many people get nervous, mental and spiritual breakdowns and have to take leave of absences to cleanse and recover.

          Now compare that to a time when you were the subject of love, praise, prayer, and blessings? How did you feel? How well did your mind work? Most likely very well. I can’t imagine how it could be anything else.

          Did you like to stay in that environment? Did you like to come back to it? You likely did.

          Everyone is telepathic. So are politicians. They receive the thoughts of the people. Everyone is connected. That is why prayer works.

          The public is like a monster with as many heads as there are population, each screaming a different voice, wanting something different.

          Have you ever spoke to a group where everyone was talking at the same time? Were you able to understand anything, or get anything done?

          Not likely.

          What happens between political leaders and the population is the same.

          Political leaders become the target, the focus of the minds of the people. Focus and intent causes energy and thoughts to flow to the intended target. Distance is not a factor in this realm. It works on the same mechanics or physics as prayer.

          It is not a religious concept. It is just a meta physical law, like the law of gravity is a law of nature.

          The New Testament gives clear instructions for people on how to behave and what kind of attitude to have towards government leaders and authority.

          1 Peter 2:13:14:15:16 “For the Lord’s sake accept the authority of every human institution, whether of the emperor as supreme, or of governors, as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right.” For this is the will of God, That by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men as free, not yet using your liberty as a cloak for vice, but as servants of God. Honor all people. Honor the king.

          Paul wrote in Romans 13:1: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.”

          (It is my interpretation that what is meant here is that we are the “Gods” that have appointed the political authorities. )

          Ecclesiastes Ch 9:

          Vs 20:

          Do not curse the king even in your thought.

          Book of Jude :

          Vs: 8

          Likewise these dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of authority.

          People always get the kind of government they deserve. The type of government the people get is a product of the people’s thoughts.

          The more we criticize our politicians the more it scrambles the politician’s minds, the harder it is for them to make good decisions and the worse our government becomes.

          Criticizing is negative prayer or cursing, or the Devil’s prayer.

          The more people complain and criticize the governments the crazier you will make the politicians and the worse conditions will get.

          That same principle applies to anyone in any situation, from husbands, wives and families, to business environments, to church management groups, to the political scene.

          Criticizing and complaining about government leaders and authority is a sin. Criticism erodes and degrades everything like acid rain

          Everyone is telepathic. That is why prayer works when you pray for someone. That is why we are thought to pray, even for our enemies.

          The more we pray for our leaders, the more we ask God to bless them with the right knowledge and wisdom for good governance the better they will lead.

          The more we pray for our politicians the better quality people will be appointed by God. The more you understand God and metaphysical law the more you will realize that it cannot be any other way.

          1. Hi Dio, I have read about the government representing the average of the population before. And it seems observable to me more or less. And I have thought of this about telepathy before, and I experience it when I make public posts on the internet as well. But ‘the people’ is a non existent thing, as well as the government. It exists to the degree that it’s observed. People heavily into politics get heavily influenced by them. I know that if I consider myself to be ‘below’ (effect) of the government, I’m f@cked. The government wants -through the press and other ways- to create this kind of effect. I’m pointing out the 3 universes, and the fact that we are not inside one big soup –we can have a choice over that. And that this big soup is some major series of implants. It is just unfair to be the effect of the average. Why should I suffer if many decide to live dishonestly? I should be able to live my own life, with the people that I want, everybody should.

            1. It is OK to co-operate and help each other. But before it can be actual co-operation and help, it must be done at will. That’s why I said all this. I’m not promoting some selfishness-separation-irresponsibility kind of thing.

            2. Spyros: Why should I suffer if many decide to live dishonestly? I should be able to live my own life, with the people that I want, everybody should.

              Dee: Yea! 🙂

            3. Spyros,

              Using the datum:

              “Any idea is only as good as it works.”

              as an opertating datum for thinking……

              You have to very carefully and thoroughly evaluate the current conditions of democracy.

              It is evident that it is not working. Things are getting worse.

              Why?

              Democracy only works with a sane and properly educated society.

              Today people increasingly think wrong is right and right is wrong. That is insanity.

              Alonzo is a perfect example.

              Today’s democracatic actions or decisions tend to be of the lowest most degraded common denominator.

              I shouldn’t have to explain any more to a bona fide and competent scientologist or a sane and competent person who studies scientology. I consider myself the latter.

              It is clearly evident that the USA and every other country in the world needs a good culling of the nut cases.

              A culling of the magnitude of the flood of Noah’s day.

              The Georgia stone henge postulates are about the only workable datums that I can imagine.

              Do a search on the subject to learn what they are if you do not know what I am talking about.

              Hubbard had good intentions and wanted to save the world via scientology, but he failed and became effect of the entheta.

              In theory it would work, but not in practice.

              Jesus had a good idea almost 2000 yrs before him.

              His success is sporadic.

              The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

              I heard it said that:

              Earth is the insane asylum of this sector of the universe.

              It sure seems to be.

              Dio

            4. Dio, stop your ranting against other people here. Calling Alanzo insane is a yellow card granted. One more and you will be booted off this blog. Do you get it?

            5. Dio: I shouldn’t have to explain any more to a bona fide and competent scientologist or a sane and competent person who studies scientology. I consider myself the latter.
              DeE: After reading you it seems apparent to me that your viewpoint is pure scientological and not from a broader perspective, but hey that’s OK. 🙂

            6. Dio, from a scientific point of view I can agree with you, over some things I have observed. I haven’t observed that this is democracy, it is just called democracy. In democracy, supposedly the people decide. When was the last time that the government asked what the people wanted? In Greece, ironically, the last time was during some dictatorship during the 60s 😛

              Also, I don’t think that LRH became effect personally of the entheta of others. Nor that SCN utterly failed. The orgs more or less failed.

              From a scientific point of view, if we compulsively copy/paste the data we are given and observe, we will never make it. Case repeats itself. It perpetuates itself. It runs in circles. It is rigged to be like that. New data need to be put there. Hubbard, whether one likes/agrees with him or not, put some radicaly new (to most people) data there, about various stuff and ultimately about the basic nature of being. Whether one likes SCN or not doesn’t matter. New conditions must be created, from zero. Not by a single person, so that then others will copy/paste him. But from each person individualy –for himself and for others too.

              If it doesn’t serve us, then f@ck logic and the collective reality and anything that makes our lives worse. Because logically speaking, if the situation on earth is so bad, then we’re all f@cked.

            7. Spyros,

              The government can’t ask the “people” what they want, in the way you mean.

              Reason one: Because if you took an honest look and evaluation, the “people” you will see that collectively the people are insane.

              Reason two ( or another angle to look the problem) : Generally speaking they are a monster with as many heads as there are people in the country all speaking their opinions at the same time.

              Many (the psychotics and nut cases) are shouting and screaming.

              Some are communicating with bullets and bombs.

              Some with the ultimate guided missles, the ultimate suicide bomber, called hijacked airplanes.

              So if you ask the people what they want, it is like one Canadain politician described it as: being a politician is like having a metal bucket over your head and having everyone bang on it with sticks.

              So democracy as you describe cannot possibly work.

              The best you can do is to have that ” multiheaded monster” elect a representative (one per so many heads) and have that person (head) represent them in a parliament.

              Parliament means a place where the people’s representatives discuss the problems of the country and find solutions, which should be the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics. (with sufficient emphasis on protecting and assisting the lunatics and the less able). In a democracy it is a necessary evil.

              In a dictatorship like Hitler’s they are culled.

              Which if it was applicable, it would be an ideal solution.

              But keep in mind any idea is only as good as it works.

              par·lia·ment (pärl-mnt)
              n.
              1. A national representative body having supreme legislative powers within the state.
              2. Parliament The national legislature of various countries, especially that of the United Kingdom, made up of the House of Lords and the House of Commons.

              [Middle English, a meeting about national concerns, from Old French parlement, from parler, to talk; see parley.]

              The most workable solution is where people are expected to elect the most competent, most able, most intelligent person of their constituency to represent them in their democratic government to make decisions for them.

              So if they do so, then that, by reason and logic, deductive reasoning, means the people are all of lower calibre than they are.

              Or the people have chosen the most intelligent one amongst them to represent them. That means all are beneath or lessor than their rep.

              So in other words, if the people elect the most competent, the most intelligent person in their constituency, and they have a problem with him or say he is no good, or a bastard or a crook or what ever, then that means by deductive reasoning that they are all worse than he is.

              So the people have to look in the mirror for the cause of the problem.

              Dio

            8. Spyros: Because logically speaking, if the situation on earth is so bad, then we’re all f@cked.

              DeE: Right, I’ll keep my glass half full, thank you!

            9. Dio wrote:

              In a dictatorship like Hitler’s they are culled.

              Which if it was applicable, it would be an ideal solution.

              Dio – I do believe that you are a True Scientologist!

              “The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals occupying the lower bands of the Tone Scale from the social order would result in an almost instant rise in the cultural tone and would interrupt the dwindling spiral into which any society may have entered.”

              – L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 170

            10. Dio, the situation of mankind that you described for me, is the situation that also the COS describes to it’s people to make them disconnect from other people and to make them depended on the COS and accept the COS dictatorship. Yes, we are all bad so we need the most competent (in terms of hypocrisy) to whip us to obedience. I know the difference between direct democracy and parliamentary democracy. The second is democracy only in name. I would call it parliamentary oligarchy. I never saw any competence in our politicians here other than in rhetorical tricks, lies, deceit, unfulfilled promises and fake smiles. They are elected because they are popular, not competent. One doesn’t have much to do with the other. It’s the worst out of the worst that wishes to dominate others, not the other way around. If Dave or others think that mankind is so bad, then it’s such an hypocrisy to talk about helping them, as it shows what kind of love they have for mankind. It’s the kind of the Jesus hypocrisy –you are sinners and I’ll put you on the straight road, unless I pack and send you to hell (if you don’t follow me). If people are indeed insane, then it is because they allow themselves to have slavemasters to whip them into obedience, and more slavemasters wont solve the problem.

            11. As per DN and SCN, man is basically good, and that which makes him appear bad, is that which makes him other determined –namely his case. Any effort to reduce self determinism, rather than enhance it, in the name of Scientology, is arbitrary, and shows no understanding of SCN basics. I’ve heard it by many that LRH did this and that and he threw someone off the ship and so now we, the elite SCN corps aboard the Freewinds throw each other in the sea to take a bath. Yeah, bullshit justifications. If they think LRH told them to do that, either their english is way worse than mine, that I’m not a native speaker, or they never bothered to read anything other than policies, or they’re too kicked in the head to grasp what I wrote before about man being basically good. And yeah, they can disagree if they like, everybody can. But they ought to quit pretending to be Scientologists and represent LRH etc

              By the way, I don’t have an ethics book right now. Wasn’t “The suppression of Scientology and Scientologists” a suppressive act?

            12. Geir, I thought about there might be some PLs or stuff that SO members read that are sort of alligned with the disciplinary methods used. Although I’m on the same time bored to do so, I would be interested to learn whether such things have been written, or invented by the COS and then said that they were written by LRH. What I have read about throwing people in the sea, is that LRH threw one guy because he nearly sunk the ship. I think maybe the COS took that and justifies abusing people. Just thinking…

            13. Spyros –

              It wasn’t just one time. Overboarding was a practice, done by LRH on dozens of people. People who could not swim, older ladies, included.

              A picture of the practice was taken in 68 and promoted in The Auditor.

              http://tonyortega.org/2013/02/23/scientology-mythbusting-with-jon-atack-fair-game/

              There is also a write up of it from a student who was there.

              [http://exscn.net/content/view/94/98/]

              Google is your friend, Spyros. There is no excuse any more for Scientologists not to know their own history.

              Alanzo

            14. What took you so long Alanzo? 😛 I wanted to suggest that you come tell me about it, but I expected that you would come anyway 😛

              OK, if you know anything about LRH refferences, that back up people who abuse people in the COS, please post, because I’m not willing to dig through all HCOPLs in case I find something.

              As per my own experience, I was never shown anything in the COS. Some bitch kept pounding over and over about how Ron said that it is good to pound your hand on the desk sometimes (I didnt see any ref.) and that’s because that was all that she did daily, when she wasn’t ‘happily’ trying to convince somebody to donate or volunteer or stuff like that.

              As for history in general: I and an OSA agent and anybody else can write anything we want –doesn’t mean it ever happened. Whoever wants to believe, can believe. I’m searching for LRH issues right now, because supposedly those guys are very on source, and all that they do is 100% LRH, and if you say otherwise, you have O/Ws…

            15. Alanzo
              Where do you see the difference between throwing another overboard, a zen master hitting the meditating student on the back with a stick and this video? Also, what’s its purpose?

            16. I posted this some time ago in a facebook group, I’m copy/pasting:

              This looks like a nice rule for a game. Imagine what Scientology would be like if this rule was followed.

              From book Self analysis — List 11 ‘Invalidation’

              “Aberrated individuals use two distinct and very aberrated methods of controlling others. The first consists of forcing the other person to do exactly what is desired with the mechanism of recrimination and denial of friendship or support unless instant compliance takes place. In other words, “You do exact what I say or I am no ally of yours”. This is outright domination. Additionally, it seeks by anger and outright criticism, accusations, and other mechanisms to pound another individual into submission by making him less…”

            17. Spyros : This looks like a nice rule for a game. Imagine what Scientology would be like if this rule was followed.

              What I see is a lot of good stuff he wrote that makes sense. Then I see a lot of policies he wrote that contradict it. Therein lies the insanity or simple catch 22.

            18. I never got to meet LRH, but indications indicate. First his tech texts that I know….100s of pages about ARC, the unhealthiness of hostility on the tone scale, acceptance level, self determination, no other determination… really much stuff. Second, I can’t imagine logically a person with intentions to dominate who could make some good tech to as-is stuff. According to personal experience and the experience of others, he did make such a tech. My personal observation of the COS that I’ve known, and assumptions about other COSes, show me that people who abused in his name, did it by misinterpreting his stuff to make them suit their attitude, and make them look ‘right’, ‘superior’ and such stuff. That’s my humble idea. If a scientologist is ‘right’ and seeks to dominate, he can go back to grade 4, and if doesn’t work then power processing may work better.

            19. …and don’t confuse what I say with someone who would be ‘pro-LRH’ and fight against the ‘anti-LRHs’. Really I don’t fight, and I don’t hate and I don’t make anyone wrong, as I don’t want to do grade 4 😛 . And to tell you a secret which isnt a secret, I’m not a scientologist. But I have read loads of stuff by that guy and I have some gratefulness, so to be honest, I express it. That’s it.

            20. No one is all good or all bad. We are all mixed bags. Good people cheat and lie. Bad people tell the truth. We are all inconsistent to a greater or lesser degree. As was LRH. He didn’t live by his words – he even says so in a lecture. He created the SO – a stark contrast to his basic philosophy. The same with the RPF, the overboarding and lots of other actions. He even created the Admin Tech – a very anti-free will and anti-responsibility regimen.

            21. DeE, you can say that again!

              “No one is all good or all bad. We are all mixed bags. Good people cheat and lie. Bad people tell the truth. We are all inconsistent to a greater or lesser degree. As was LRH. He didn’t live by his words – he even says so in a lecture. He created the SO – a stark contrast to his basic philosophy. The same with the RPF, the overboarding and lots of other actions. He even created the Admin Tech – a very anti-free will and anti-responsibility regimen.” Isene

            22. ‘we are all inconsistent to a greater or lesser degree’
              Isn’t it a beauty of life? The surprise, the unexpected….

              ‘noone is all good or all bad, we are all mixed bags’ -yes
              e.g. the victim serves the victimizer by playing the role of the victim for the victimizer to be able to play as he wishes
              the mechanism of ‘recrimination’ (countercharge) makes it possible
              it seems to me now that the dichotomies and the mechanisms serve just one purpose
              – that everybody can be right and satisfied even if on the surface it doesn’t look like so

            23. Yes Geir, I don’t really know what LRH did with the admin tech. I never had interest in admin nor ethics tech myself, so I never learned much, except from some things that I was asked to learn from time to time. I thought that if I can handle all by handling case, why bother with mechanics? For me it was like what we say that if we can not-have a reactive mind, why bother to learn what each thingy inside it does? I still believe that all the trouble one can have is case, so it can be as-ised, and this extends way beyond thre 1st dynamic. I point out inconsistencies, if I find. I cannot say that I know what he did, when I don’t, but likewise nobody can with certainty –only assumptions.

  6. NO ideology has the power to MAKE one stupid…..only the identification with thought…the YOU is ever PRESENT in its ‘virgin’ ‘potential’….
    The Axioms, as well as the concept list in 88008, when clearly understood, make it possible as a TOOL to see where identification can happen…..also TRUE meditation is a ‘tool’ for that….

    1. Life can be aware of itself, its abilities only through its products – in which case differentiation, that is con-scio-us co-operation can take place…..the ‘tool-maker’ is not the ‘tool’ and neither not the tool.

          1. When we were kids and we were playing, and I was the ninja, nobody believed me as much 😦

            Now, I can say that I am a , and everybody gets immediately convinced 😀 because it isn’t my imagination, it is reality hihihihihihihi

          2. Spyros
            ” I talk about things that don’t exist, cause it’s a funny thing’ ROFWL
            That’s one of the biggest secrets but only a few can confront! And Spyros….I ‘do’ things just to see I didn’t ‘do’ anything at all….

            1. M: That’s one of the biggest secrets but only a few can confront!

              S: Yes, we can’t afford to waste something which isn’t there. We can’t create anything else 😛

    2. What makes you stupid is specifically the unexamined assumptions in an ideology. When you start “thinking with” an ideology, you become unaware of how you came to your own conclusions. In fact, they are not your conclusions, they are the ideologies’ conclusions.

      An ideology makes you input infinities, and output finite solutions that will only support the ideology.

      Coming up with solutions that only support the ideology is the way the Church of Scientology got to be what it is, and has made David Miscavige who he is today.

      Adopting an ideology to do your thinking for you is the basic mistake that many humans have made throughout history, not just Scientologists.

      Alanzo

      1. Alanzo: What makes you stupid is specifically the unexamined assumptions in an ideology. When you start “thinking with” an ideology, you become unaware of how you came to your own conclusions. In fact, they are not your conclusions, they are the ideologies’ conclusions.

        Hear, hear! This is the meat without the potatoes.

          1. Dragos72: This is exactly the opposite: it’s the potatoes without meat…

            🙂 Isn’t it nice to have a choice? Each would do to sustain you and more pleasurable to add a salad or some veggies. Maybe it’s dessert first? Don’t worry dragos, I’m a little weird.

            1. dragos72: Come on…you’re not weird 🙂

              Thanks I guess. I always considered myself average, nice and normal. Now late in life I’ve become more mischievous and think of myself on the weird side, for lack of a better word.
              Just looked it up. Unearthly; mysterious. Odd; fantastic; queer. Yo, will go for the fantastic, laughing! 🙂

  7. About scientology making people stupid: I have been thoroughly indocrinated ever since my very early ages to be thoroughly stupid, and I have been punished in cases that I wasn’t stupid enough. For example I am asked to believe that I ought to work (any work, whether I want to support the activity or not) for pennies while the guy I work for does nearly nothing and gets rich, and that is called ‘ethics’ and if I don’t do it I am -in a way or another- ‘bad’. Well the only goodness that the bank agreement of society support is being obedient, agreeable, a sucker, weak and other things. I’m saying this as I believe that one should stay uninfluenced by what others want to beleve, at which point he can control at least himself. I would personally preffer blow my body’s brains out than to ‘get real’ or have no -what some would like to say- ‘delusions. I like my illusions, and if I confused my own illusions with another’s, then I would be delusional. Get out of as many cults as you like, but in the end don’t forget to deal with the cult of the so-called one and only ‘reality’.

  8. Belief systems, intended and/or imposed to be wholly accepted, are an illustration of the liabilities of blind, unquestioning and lasting acceptance, aka “fixed ideas”, “fixed solutions”, and/or “stable datums”- the insertion of the “stable” idea is a subtle and insidious way of implanting blinders in people; I suggest that instead, one works with the idea of “a valuable idea, subject to future examination, improvement and/or abandonment”.

    1. “…the insertion of the “stable” idea is a subtle and insidious way of implanting blinders in people”.

      Dexter, isn’t it true that on Level 1 LRH himself describes how insidious the stable datum can be and that on Grade 1 a pc handles its relationship to problems and learns its liabilities?

      Also, LRH stated the following in Problems of Work:

      “Any body of knowledge is built from one datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion and on which others are aligned.” (Problems of Work)

      What I get is that a stable datum can be a positive if all the references are taken into consideration.

  9. Geir, here’s something that makes both you and LRH right. Tom Campbell first talks about the problem with beliefs and also some things about Einstein’s barrier to find a unifying theory.

    Then, at about 4:00 he talks a bit about “readiness potential” experiments. Here’s what LRH stated in 8-8008 that I think explains the phenomena.

    “In such a way, an individual with the “very best MEST universe, Mark 10,000 ears” takes no responsibility for having implanted the sensation of sound in order to receive the sensation of sound. A preclear as he comes up the tone-scale more and more often catches himself doing this, and even though he does not know the principles involved (for no preclear has to be educated in Scientology to receive benefit from it), he recognizes that even in the case of a loud crash, his continuation of association from his environment permits him to perceive with others that a crash has taken place of objects which he with others continuously recreates solidly, and that he must actually cause for his own perception the sound of the crash.”

  10. First of all, Ronald Reagan is my favourite American President, so I firmly assert that I’m an idiot 🙂 Even that, I’m not suffering of “Reaganism”.
    I feel a mix of feelings reading this article, now I agree 100%, 5 seconds later I totally disagree. Anyway, it’s definitelly provocative and perfect for a debate.
    The Axioms of “Reaganism” are a poor and pathetic example of leftist humour, but I grant Geir with the inocence presumtion just because as a Norwegian he is tempted to believe that all the governments behave as the Norwegian government. Which is totall wrong.
    As a foreigner, I can testify that Norwegian government is one of the fewest in the world for which the human beeing really counts. I never felt a second that the government is my enemy. A fact which is not everywhere the same. Other governments can be real evil, corrupt or deepened in big lacks of democracy.
    There are certain countries in this world in which (yes, Geir!) “the government destroys everything it touches”. Or “Private enterprise can always do a better job of anything than the government can”. It’s a fact, these are the roots of capitalism. Why to desconsider them?
    The benefits of small (or non-) interference of the government in businesses or in daily life was not felt only by Godman Sachs or Lehman Brothers CEO’s. Hundreds of thousands of ordinary American families during the mid ’50’s felt those benefits too. The entire post-war economic boom was based on “Reaganism” rules. I cannot say was perfect, but it worked.
    “Reaganism” can be both an ideology or a mechanism. It depends how you see it. But in neither cases it makes you an idiot.
    “Government run road projects are filled with people who just stand around all day and never get any work done”. I know it was writen ironical, but it’s true! Take a look at Russia, Eastern Europe, half of Asia or Latin America. Yepp, it’s full of laziness and corruption. No offence, just the reality.
    “No ideology can match the infinity of life, or the infinity of you.” Just considering others as “Reaganists” reveals a person which is far than non-ideological.

      1. Thanks! I read every single word of this blog, but not always write very much, that’s true 🙂 PS. Never asked you, are you from Hungary? Or have Hungarian ancestors? Toth is a common and widespreaded name in Hungary.

  11. dragos
    Thanks for your question. Yes, I live in Hungary, in a city called Pecs. It was the Cultural Capital of Hungary in 2010 – without much PR and sales (using Geir’s words)…proof of this…HaHa…I have tried to find a really good video for you to have a glimpse…well, not real success, I have chosen this. Beautiful, quiet yet active place with very nice people. I also never asked you where you are from, where you live, your interests, your ‘goals’ AND the
    way you see life…(?)

    1. I know Pecs very well, cause I know your football team, Pecsi Dozsa. It’s very peaceful indeed 🙂 I was born in Romania, but honestly I don’t know exactly where I belong. I lived in Holland, Spain, Greece and Norway. But I’m home in Bucharest but I’ll move on back to Norway this year, hopefully in Autumn. Nothing special about me: working all my life in medical and wellness field as massage therapist, I love history, politics, football and handball (but I hate Gyor and Anita Gorbicz!). I’m a normal, ordinary man. Not better or worst than others.

      1. Wow! Nice that you know about Pecs! It must have been good to experience different cultures deeper I .have travelled a lot, the longest stay was one month. I love massage, all types, my favourites are ‘thai’ and ‘chakra’. I haven’t been to for some time, though…the guy is also…hm. a reiki ‘master’ and into some Eastern practices. Do you do any of these?
        ‘Normal, ordinary man’…love it! Life is the best when it is simple!

        1. Not exactly, Marianne…Not Thai and Reiki. I’m much more a Westerner when it come to massage: much more body than soul. It’s very simple: a man come with a back injury, you have to fix it. You have to, cause the customer paid and maybe he is in pain. A pregnant lady come with terrific neck and lower back pains. It’s normal, due to the posture during pregnancy. I have to choose a confortable position for protecting the baby and then, in 60 minutes, to relief her pain. This is what I was trained for. In a Spa it’s something else: relax, reflexology, sea algue packages, etc. But from my experience, only about 20% of people come at massage just for relaxing. All the others have a specific problem (stress included, of course. Stress is a big problem).

          1. dragos
            Besides the ‘technical’, the ‘movements, touches’….you, as ‘soft life energy’, touch the ‘other’s’ soft life energy…..so healing can take place due to your specialized knowledge + this undercurrent of LIFE. Have you ever thought about it from this point of view?

            1. dragos
              ‘much more body than soul’
              What I wanted to point to in the above was: you as ‘soul’ with your knowledge (perception of the physical disorder and ability to put it into order) solve another ‘soul’s problem (misperception of the physical and inability to put it into order).
              You see, it cannot be otherwise than a ‘soul’ is helping another ‘soul’ to put matter, energy into order – YOU cannot be non-spiritual, you are always spiritual. You are in this case CAUSE over matter and energy. Pain, injury are bigger disorders – you are in these cases a ‘bigger’ cause-solver than in case of a relax massage – that is, YOU ARE great as far as ‘matter’ and ‘spirit-soul’ are concerned!!!

            2. dragos
              Another interesting aspect is the question of ‘money’.

              Let’s say that money is a representation, a symbol of Life’s Ability and Trust.

              As much as YOU as LIFE (spirit) is ABLE to produce, use, handle (‘put into order’) matter-energy (the body) and as much as you TRUST yourself and the other person trusts you that you are able to help, as much ‘energy’=’money’ you will get.
              If you do your job well, the other person will be happy-satisfied and will trust you and
              come back.
              I have written all the above because you write ‘ I’m much more a Westerner’ – yes, as far as the ‘techniques’ are concerned BUT underneath the surface of any technique is the same LIFE source….YOU.

            3. Absolutely! 🙂 Communication between people is extremely important in my job. About your point of view, I don’t deny it, but as I told you, I’m focused on the primary result. No pain, no game! 🙂

            4. I was never a man desperate after money. My point is very simple: you do a good job, money will come to you 🙂 Simple as that. And always, but always, have a special feeling for disabled people. This is me.

            5. dragos
              Reading what you write….words stopped for a while! Beautiful!
              For me everything in life teaches something…twins: love ‘lines’, did you notice that?
              Autistic people: true (not ‘social’) communication by love.
              Why do you have a ‘special feeling’ for disabled people?

            6. Because I’ve had myself a lot of knee injuries and surgical operations (ankle and knees). My first operation when I was 15, my last when I was 22. After that, 2 years of recovery. I was in wheelchair for a while, I walked with crunches and after that I learned to walk again on my own feet. I’ve suffered a lot and I know exactly what disabled people are passing through. Special feelings for them means solidarity, not pity. You can say also empathy…

            7. dragos
              Thaks for telling me about you, I totally get what you are saying! You experienced it first and with this experience you can really-authentically SERVE. You are GREAT that you learnt to walk again on your feet and in what you are doing!!!
              Another aspect of this for me is that someone who e.g. cannot walk is immediatelly putting my attention to the beauty of being able to walk and gets me out of this obvious-atomatism of walking. Another who cannot see is a lesson for the eyes…You see what I mean? Besides the ’empathy’ , I feel that they kind of ‘serve’ other people.

            8. Of course I understood what you mean 🙂 You appreciate your own health on its real value just when you loose it…

            9. Yes, yes Dragos….AND when you lose your health and start to APPRECIATE health,
              you are ABLE to re-build your health now CONCIOUSLY by your own FREE WILL !
              As you did!

  12. I have been prosetylizing about the problems and the lunacy of beliefs for many years on these forums, especially on Geirs forums.

    And all I got was scoffed, scorned, berated, condemned, prosecuted, tarred and feathered and crucified.

    And now is the first time that I see that my seeds have sprouted in a few minds.

    And now these minds are parroting my words as if they were there own.

    I find that amazing.

    A belief is a confession of ignorance.

    A belief is the function of the intellectually challenged or the intellectually dishonest.

    It means that you to not know what you are talking about.

    Dio

        1. Geir and Alonzo,

          Show me one time that I have said that there are “no beliefs” in scientlogy?

          Dio

          1. I don’t know. I was asking.

            Do you think the reactive mind, as described by L Ron Hubbard, is a belief or a fact?

            Alanzo

            1. Alonzo,

              A whole bunch of red flags (bad signs) pop up from your post.

              I will only address a couple:

              You are the one who asked; if I was the one who asked:

              Quoting you:

              “Is this the Dio who says that there are no beliefs in Scientology?”

              So you must have seen somewhere that I said there are beliefs in scn.

              So I asked you where?

              And you twisted the issue around.

              Your thinking is very aberrated, twisted and dishonest. I can feel your entheta snares and tenticles eminating from your post.

              If I get into your aberrated games condition, I will become effect of your entheta and go insane.

              I learned from experience that it is not a good idea to get into a peeing contest with a skunk.

              Dio

            2. “I will become effect of your entheta and go insane.”

              Chris: Funny.
              Dee: Funny indeed! Ron must have said that someplace and people agree?

            3. DeE,

              That’s granola talk.

              The truth is not determined by Hubbard or some arbitrary.

              Haven’t you ever been in an aberrated entheta environment for an extended period of time and found yourself going crazy too?

              If not, you have lived a sheltered life in some fairy tale land.

              Or else something is wrong that I can’t identify.

              Dio

            4. Dio: Haven’t you ever been in an aberrated entheta environment for an extended period of time and found yourself going crazy too?

              Right and what I’ve done is use self-control or a self willed GTFO 🙂

            5. Chris: Oh deE! That’s just your granola talking!

              How’d you guess! It’s magic.

            6. Dio wrote:

              So you must have seen somewhere that I said there are beliefs in scn.

              So I asked you where?

              And you twisted the issue around.

              Actually, I asked if you were the one who maintained there were NO beliefs in Scientology.

              Then, I answered you. (“I don’t know” is an answer, even in Scn while drilling the TRs.)

              Then I asked you whether you believed the reactive mind was a belief or a fact.

              And then you say that you think that I may drive you insane.

              Wow, dude. Take a chill-pill. Have a cream soda. Do some hug-ology. Go for a walk.

              Alanzo

            7. Isene: A much needed hug awaits.

              DeE: A happy note and I most assuredly will join whoever goes, thanks.

            8. I will start walking to Norway for that hug, as soon as we get a cold enough winter to freeze the Atlantic ocean, or as soon as I figure out how to walk on water.

              Which ever occurs first.

              Or if DeE can walk on water as some granola effect, she can carry me on her back.

              Dio

            9. Dio: Or if DeE can walk on water as some granola effect, she can carry me on her back.

              He (you) ain’t heavy he’s my brother. What time do you want me to pick you up darlin’? 🙂 Maybe we’ll fly!

            10. That is a good idea. I should of thought of that myself. I was just doing what I was told and Geir said to walk, so that is what I was planning to do.

              I will have time next Sunday.

              You can pick me up at 8 AM.

              See you then, Sweetie,

              Dio

            11. Dio: You can pick me up at 8 AM. See you then, Sweetie

              Dee: Make it 10 AM and you’re on…. I’m retired and stay up late you see!
              See you then…

            12. deE,

              10 am is ok with me,

              as long as we are back by supper time.

              Unless Geir is providing extended stay accomodations…..including food.

              Dio

            13. Dio: Unless Geir is providing extended stay accomodations…..including food.

              Wouldn’t that be nice and maybe a boat ride too?
              Supah! Look forward to it.

  13. Spyros
    I have just started to look at this question of right and wrong. Noone has the power
    to make me ‘wrong’ if I haven’t made myself wrong previously in any topic. It is funny, as the ‘outside world’ is showing me a mirror then, that is by ‘making me right’
    by agreeing to my ‘right to be wrong’.
    HaHa…life will please me in any way…..(placebo=please).

  14. Can I have your attention! (No “please” here.)

    This is the boot camp of a conscripted military of a half malevolent/ half benevolent dictator.

    My military is of comparable magnitude to the Salvation Army.

    I am very poor at following “rules” or status quo. Unless I have challenged it, disected it and ransacked it, and tested it to determine if it was worth for me to do so or the best thing to do. To see how it worked on all dymanics.

    It is time to think outside the box of ideologies, beliefs, data that has outlived it’s usefulness, etc..

    The treads on this blog and others only at best get to the edge of the box or on rare occasion only peak over the edge.

    And still mostly rehash old nonsense, partial truths, sometimes truths and almost truths, and false truths, lies, and just plain stupid talk, babble and jibberish and the like. .

    So much of it is nothing more than the voice of insanity, psychosis, neurosis, backward thinking, non thinking, parroting, stupidity and ignorance.

    Same crap just different color and different pile.

    The blind leading the blind.

    Or the blind men describing the elephant effect.

    E.i. : One blind man is holding the tail and he thinks the elephant looks like a rope. Etc. . I am sure at least most of you have heard that story before, so I don’t have to tell the whole story. If not, look it up on line.

    It really hurts my brain to read this stuff and it gives me the heebee jeebees.

    Look at the following this way:

    We are all looking for the healing of the mind, body and spirit, maximizing our full potential, wanting to be enlightened and what ever else we want individually.

    Some are looking for something but do not know what it is.

    Hubbard thought for himself, questioned everything, evaluated everything in the known universe (studied the data of 50,000 yrs of thinking men) and then some, and took this stuff, thought again, and again, stood on the shoulders of those he learned from, looked further, put his mind to work and improved upon what he learned from everyone else and took this subject to a whole new level.

    That is the main reason why many of us are still here. I know I am.

    Then, in the article “how to study a science”, in essence, he said not to parrot him and think for ourselves, do our own research, evaluate everything of comparable magnitude in the known universe, then build a new and better bridge.

    But everyone has in fact failed or damn near it.

    Everyone I have met is a painfully very poor and sad example of the workability of the highest ideals of scn at best.

    I have been studying as many subjects of comparable magnitude as I could for 40 yrs.

    Before and after scn.

    As I said, I don’t believe anything, simply because it is intellectual ineptness at best and intellectual dishonesty at the worst.

    It is a confession of ignorance and stupidity.

    Beliefs and believe are traps.

    Belief and believe are very bad words and should never be used by an intelligent person.

    Now to get to my point:

    The latest subject of comparable magnitude I have been evaluating is “sun gazing”.

    I first heard of it a couple of yrs, ago, but did not do much about it, other than know the term.

    I would lie in the sun like sun tanning and look at the sun.

    I realized I felt better for some days after.

    Last Sunday, was the first nice day this yr and I was in the sun doing my thing.

    But I decided to do a search on line on “how to do sun gazing” to see what others thought or knew about it.

    Longer story short….

    To my amazment, the claims on line are similar in some respects to the claims of scn.

    It is a subject of comparable magnitude. The goal is at least similar.

    According to what I read, doing sun gazing the right way is supposed to heal all the problems of the mind, body and spirit.

    I recommend everyone to search:

    “How to do sun gazing”.

    Read at least a half a dozen websites and watch as many videos as you can to learn as much as you can from other people’s experience then evaluate and think for yourself.

    Here is a pretty good and sensible video to start with:

    and here is one good website to start with:

    http://www.sungazing.com/index.php?p=1_5_How-to-Sungaze

    But if you embark on this journey, make sure you don’t limit yourself to these websites and only go by what they say.

    Think and evaluate and experiment for yourself.

    Don’t be a sheople.

    It is ok to follow, but don’t follow blindly.

    Follow only on your own determinism, with your brain in gear.

    It has been my experience that the highest truth to any subject, the best answer to any problem is usually very simple and free or very close to it.

    This just might be it.

    It is worth a good try.

    Dio

    1. Dio, What an interesting site about the sun. Taking your whole post here I come to a conclusion. Aren’t we all having fun here though? sliding up and down the scale with different viewpoints, landing at various places, learning and looking at different views? This is what life to me is all about. Thanks for some good stuff. 🙂

      1. DeE,

        I am glad that you found the post on sun gazing useful.

        I don’t intentionally go down down the tone scale.

        Because when I have done so, I realized that added reality, mass or solidity to that level, what ever it is.

        And if I did that I loose a step forward, and I do not wish to do that.

        Everything you think, say and do matters.

        Dio

        1. Dio: Everything you think, say and do matters.

          You are right and a very kind person. However my opinion has been changing regarding the seriousness of things. I’m getting more into the spiritual idea of letting go, giving up and relaxing my hold on things which are attachments, like many words I had been conditioned by. Things mattering is seriousness and them not mattering is more laughter and lightness.
          I still have a lot more work to do with thoughts, thanks. 🙂

    2. Dio, I’m only saying this because you call upon SCN. If you think such stuff about people, you can get rid of it, by running it out, not by not-ising it. You create it for yourself, in the first place. This applies to you, me, Hubbard, an OT 666, everybody. Or else, let’s scrap all SCN along with it’s ‘unreal’ theories about responsibility and as-isness, and affinity and all that stuff.

      1. *sorry I meant this CAN apply to anyone, if and when charge is created. Charge is not truth. If it is, let’s quit talking about philosophical stuff, and go to the beach. It’s sunny outside.

        1. No, I’m not suppressing Dio’s comm. But Dio said whoever doesn’t agree with him is retarded. He can say what he wants to say, then I can answer appropriately, no?

          1. Spyros,

            Quoting you:

            “But Dio said whoever doesn’t agree with him is retarded.”

            Where and when did I say that?

            Dio

            1. Yes, you didn’t say that whoever disagrees is retarded, but in the last messages about mankind, and people and people who have read LRH, and everybody you talked about parrots, psychotics and generally bad, wrong people. The way you put it, it included everybody.

        2. Spyros,

          Why is charge not truth?

          Or why is charge not true?

          Does charge not exist?

          Is charge not real?

          How do you define truth?

          Dio

          1. Dio, it depends on what one means by truth and real. I still use the SCN definitions where ‘real’ means agreement and truth is the opposite of lie(s), alterations, primary creation. So, I think that if something is truth, it contains no lies, and consequently no not-isness. So, no charge.

            But in any case, if one wishes to think something is truth or real, it is not my right to say otherwise. I only mentioned it because you made it seem like you spoke the truth about SCN and that others hadn’t understood it, because they are parrots. So, I jumped up…but ok, I also changed my mind afterwards. So, I no longer protest 😛

            1. It´s all fine SP, remember this: Our opinion of another, more often than not reveals little of the other, but says a great deal about us

            2. I agree Rafael. I think it is always about us –not as individuals, but nevertheless us. It also applies to me and everybody and there is no exception. Who is to blame but me? I’d rather not blame me. “No tolerance for intolerance” 🙂

  15. Here is another good video by the same guy.

    I like this guy because he does not seem to fall under the granola category.

    Not too much anyways.

    Dio

  16. Dio
    It’s easy to miss that all of this is Basic Truth — Love, no matter what form it takes.
    I am still scared sometimes and in some areas of life to face its huge power.

  17. I have found out what was wrong with Ethics Conditions. It is that a condition is not included in them. I contacted a mystical mystic and he told me about it, but I cannot say who he is, because I let it be known, he will not longer be mystical.

    The missing Condition, is called the LOL Condition. It is that awkward moment when you realise that what you play against is yourself. It results in LOLing. And the formula is to lol.

    1. Spyros: The missing Condition, is called the LOL Condition. It is that awkward moment when you realise that what you play against is yourself. It results in LOLing. And the formula is to lol.

      Yes! Much better than Getting the F Out, stay in the game and play (except in dangerous organizations.) LOL good formula.

      1. Although that was Spyrology, I wonder was ‘power’ or ‘power change’ something similar to what I described? I have very surface knowledge of the conditions. All I know about conditions is that I was assigned some conditions while the person who assigned them to me was stuck between confusion, treason and enemy towards me. I guess that explains why I was so bad for her.

        1. Spyros
          Have you ever experienced that every human being, or rather, every being has a unique ‘energy print’? Also, whatever one creates has a unique energy ‘attached’ to it which remaines in consciousness ‘forever’? This can explain, for example, that when an aware being is ‘born’ again, can recognize some objects that he left behind in the previous life. It is not only the ‘awareness’ and ‘memory’, it may have to do with that unique energy too.

          1. Marianne, I still examine my own energies and often I find I don’t have any. Actually, this was part of my biggest win ever. It all depends on what ‘I’ means for somebody. I think it (identity) is a very basic (if not THE) key in one’s case.

            1. Thanks! I see what you mean. For me there are different ‘shifts’ of perceptions, different levels of consciousness.
              The ‘me’ as a concept-identity doesn’t exist. So there is no energy ‘attached’ to the
              non-existent. Yet, this ‘non-identity’ ‘me’ is able to produce a unique energy print. It can be felt at one level. At another level – nothing exists. It’s ‘all’ probabilistic.

            2. Yes, to know self is what this game is about, as it all started with ‘potential to be’. So, I cannot say anything. All I can say for myself is that the more I look, the less is there to look at, and think about etc

  18. Of all of Geir’s posts:

    “Why ideologies can make you stupid”

    And beliefs are also sub ideologies.

    Like chapters in a book.

    Is probably the only one I will remember.

    It has major significance.

    It is the only one that really hits a nail square on the head.

    It is an eye opener.

    The statement puts into broad clarity and succinctness what I have known nebulously or what takes a page to explain, for 20 yrs.

    The statement takes the problem of beliefs to a whole new level.

    Getting to learn to function, to think without beliefs and ideologies only requires learning to research, evaluate and use reason to make the most superior computation on any subject, to know the truth on that particular subject.

    If this idea gets into the minds of everyone in the world or at least enough to create critical mass, and takes root, the world could well change, that is; stop being stupid, almost over night.

    It puzzles me why some participants of this blog, still use the words?

    Dio

    1. Dio: If this idea gets into the minds of everyone in the world or at least enough to create critical mass, and takes root, the world could well change, that is; stop being stupid, almost over night.

      Dee: Great post. This OP also helped me a lot too, since I hadn’t looked at it that way.

    2. Dio
      ‘It puzzles me why some participants of this blog, still use the words?’
      I understand how you mean it. The answer is in your post..’learning to research…to
      know the truth on that particular subject’. We are in co-operation here. Referring to
      one of Geir’s earlier posts ( Tools, last September), we use the words as tools freely
      in a certain topic and writing and reading in this way we are learning from each other. No matter that there are several ways of putting communication into form, this
      one has its own beauty and usefulness. I love reading the posts and the comments!

        1. 🙂 On this blog… Just joking, of course 🙂 I don’t know, maybe they took a break 🙂

    1. Marianne, thanks for thinking of me. I don’t know about Maria, but I’ve been busy with “other fish” (as we jokingly say) but I do at least read and enjoy many of the comments, including yours! I’ll start posting again when I have more time for it. 🙂

          1. MT: Everybody is taking a break?

            Hey, maybe we’ve run out the stupid on ideologies? Me, I’m working on a small Monet garden, made available by a 90% off small flower plants at a major store. Also taking time to smell the roses. 🙂

            1. With all this stuff we talk about (tolerance, not believing, no fighting etc) we run out of problems to solve. Let’s blame something! 😛

            2. Yes. There seems to be other blogs that relish in blaming that are able to discuss the same points over and over and over.

            3. Isene: There seems to be other blogs that relish in blaming that are able to discuss the same points over and over and over.

              Yes, and it does get boring!

            4. Spyros: Let’s blame something!

              I was going to comment – it’s Isenes blog so lets blame him. Hehe. Then I read all the neat comments and really Isene is spot on.
              There’s also so much scio news that’s very interesting and some people like to keep informed of what’s happening.

            5. Blame something? Oh, Isene is not a thing. Sometimes I’m half-fast! LOL.
              How about the weather, it always is good for it? 🙂

            6. Geir
              I have been browsing your blog and there are numerous OP-s in which you write
              about the ‘Key to Life’ in several, interesting ways! I joined the blog a couple months
              ago and now I am truely amazed by what you have shared here out of generosity.
              I advise others to go back 2-3 years. You will be fascinated!

            7. Oh god, I had a look and it’s about SCN lol I imagine it funny to read by Geir pro SCN views, after what has been written the past couple of months.

              Chris: Now you are talking!

              SP: It’s your fault!

            8. Spyros
              Geir’s pro-Life views! Full of Life, imagination, simple, practical advice! Not to mention the artistic value of the whole blog. And Geir, if you read this – not because I say so – this is a fact.

            9. deE: I was going to comment – it’s Isenes blog so lets blame him. Hehe.

              SP: Indeed, I think he gathered us here to turn us agaist SCN.

              deE: There’s also so much scio news that’s very interesting and some people like to keep informed of what’s happening.

              SP: Trying to differentiate between the SCN I learned by study and by experience is already too much of a pain. To read news about the COS, would make me permanently sick 😛 (the only new I’m interested in for the moment, is that when the COS will get shut, so then I’ll go find some people I used to know)

            10. Spyros: (the only new I’m interested in for the moment, is that when the COS will get shut, so then I’ll go find some people I used to know)

              Darlin’ I’m with you on that all the way. However, I like watching it crumble (even if slowly) and there’s plenty of news about that, especially the recent raid. Helps me see the future, and be part of it.

            11. Spyros
              ‘I think he gathered us here…’ and the rest of your comment.
              This is the first time I am angry with you, even if you are joking! Will you please look at what you wrote and comment on what you see in that.

            12. Marianne: Will you please look at what you wrote and comment on what you see in that.

              SP: Hm I just see a bunch of latin fonts. What about it? 😛

            13. lol I thought about that Marianne, but I thought you might already be too much out of ARC to grasp what I would say –“a bunch of weird lines” or worse…. 😛

            14. ‘out of ARC’ – there is no such thing, that there is, is an apparency…when I say ‘angry’, it just a ‘form’ of affinity….it’s all affinity…

            15. Marianne: ‘out of ARC’ – there is no such thing, that there is, is an apparency…when I say ‘angry’, it just a ‘form’ of affinity….it’s all affinity…

              If we speak in terms of truth, it will get really crazy. Time, irresponsible persistence is the basic lie. Let’s do that 😛

            16. dragos
              Thanks! It was taken two days ago. Face looks tired a little, though, I am going to put here a better, more realistic one a little later. Yes, it’s a teddy but not mine.
              Your photo is very funny, I read it was your birthday. Also, the other one is very cool too! The blog has got a little silent, I think we should put more life into it!
              Geir, you too, if you read it!

            17. MT: Thanks! It (photo) was taken two days ago.

              D: I assume that is you and what a nice smile. You look so much younger.

            18. deE: I like watching it crumble

              Spyros: Yep, I know the feeling. But I wont like it if those Churches shut and then all those ubber-ethical ones join the internet SCN force and start whinning about how they got victimised by SCN. The contradictions kinda freaks me out.

            19. Spyros: “how L. Ron Hubbard deceived them, would give me a feeling of schizophrenia.”

              D: Know what you mean, but we were there once and got through it, yes?

              “if those Churches shut and then all those ubber-ethical ones join the internet SCN force and start whinning about how they got victimised by SCN.”

              D: It will be many, many years before that would happen since they’ve started renting out facilities for money. Also it’s more like they will just shrink with no new members and no bridge except Mest.

            20. I mean to have people who used SCN to oppress on a daily basis, telling me about their bad experiences with SCN, and how L. Ron Hubbard deceived them, would give me a feeling of schizophrenia.

            21. They will need to decompress just as any of us needed to. Understanding that and doing what we can to help them as they pop out should belay those schizo feelings and give us a sense of progress toward our own goals of greater peace and harmony. Or they, as almost all ex-Scio’s have, may simply iterate off into another totally different direction leaving this experience behind. Almost everyone who has had any contact with Scientology has done this. By far most people who were ever in contact with Scientology do not obsess over their experiences as some of us do. The world is a big place and Scientology never became the world saving organization that it claimed to be. In truth, taking a bigger view, a few newspaper, magazine articles and op-ed columns have covered the entire phenomena. A few thousand out of billions of people ever knew it came and went. Seeing Scientology in perspective not only of my own reality where it was huge, but in relation to the world at large has a calming effect on me.

            22. Chris: Seeing Scientology in perspective not only of my own reality where it was huge, but in relation to the world at large has a calming effect on me.

              D: Right on Chris!

              Chris: By far most people who were ever in contact with Scientology do not obsess over their experiences as some of us do.

              D: As you mention I know so many who were in and now out and they could care less and are just living life. Guess we’re special in that we still care about the abuses, wrongs and hope to make and see them be made right somehow. So we watch and help those that need however we can. It is an interesting subject to be sure for some and that includes as many non-scio’s.

            23. deE, Yes it is interesting to me how fixated I have been on my experiences in Scientology. I can give the reasons but they are the usual ones regarding betrayal. To stave off making aberrant decisions about “how things like this must never happen again and therefore, I will . . . (fill in blank). . . !” Because of what I’ve learned blogging here, I now apply mindfulness as a poka-yoke against putting myself in such a vulnerable position again. No aberrant postulate. Simple and steady attentiveness coupled with study and experience helps me understand I should be fairly safe from similar scams in the future.

            24. Chris: Simple and steady attentiveness coupled with study and experience helps me understand I should be fairly safe from similar scams in the future.

              De: Absolutely! David and I got interested in an Indian Science of the Soul group and enjoyed it and was good for us for almost 15 years.
              The only reason we signed up is it didn’t cost us anything in money and books were at cost, like $2-5. Only asking 10% of your time for meditation and was on own honor. Was a nice fair group of people but most were stricter than we in our diets. David gave many dedicated years but did not receive the supposed result. But no problems and had a good life and I am still friends with some, just not associate. I gave up on the diet and Sunday Service for various reasons.

              Btw, I’ll poke-a yoke-ya! 😉

            25. Spyros
              One of the things I love in this blog is our theta co-operation! Read your comments and look at what song I have put into the soap-box almost the same time of your comments. See what I see? I just love it, love it!

            26. Chris, SCN is composed of individuals, which are very well a source of the current situation that other SCNists or ex SCNists complain about. If they do what they do because they think or claim that Hubbard told them so, doesn’t negate their doing what they do. I find it closer to truth to assign cause to existing individuals than to people that haven’t been around for 30 years or so. The schizo wasn’t an invalidation of their sanity, but I said it to depict the amount of contradiction of a person who does oppress daily in the Church, and then gets out and out of nowhere he is a poor victim, and then it’s SCN’s fault, as if SCN has nothing to do with that guy.

            27. Spyros: “and then gets out and out of nowhere he is a poor victim, and then it’s SCN’s fault, as if SCN has nothing to do with that guy.”

              D: just a short phase for some, until he realizes that he let it happen and then move forward. Self compassion and forgiveness is important imo.

            28. Marianne sorry but I have some computer issues and I cannot view that page easily (with videos turned on) as it has become way too heavy with all those videos 😛

            29. deE: Know what you mean, but we were there once and got through it, yes?
              SP: Yes there was a time that I left that COS and I was very pissed. I wanted to #$%$ the $%#% out of some girls, though I didn’t turn against all of them, nor against SCN in general. Actually, back then I was a Standard Techer, and I disliked anything about SCN other than Standard Tech 😛
              deE: It will be many, many years before that would happen since they’ve started renting out facilities for money. Also it’s more like they will just shrink with no new members and no bridge except Mest.
              SP: They rent facilities for money, as if DM’s $ is not enough huh? I hope the superior ones will stay there for the duration of the universe. But the rest should get out bit by bit.
              deE: Self compassion and forgiveness is important imo.
              SP: Yes, and it must be accompanied by some personal responsibility too. A person that ‘put ethics’ on people in the COS, and sees nothing wrong about it now, yet only blames the COS etc can be liable to use other methods to ‘put ethics’ on people. He must take responsibility for himself first, before he corrects the COS. I don’t advocate any harshness against any sort of a person who has done something harmful in the past. I’m not a COS ethics officer, nor a judge, nor do I have any superior ethics. But that is different than to let the harmful occur in present time, so as not to be harsh.

            30. Spyros: He must take responsibility for himself first, before he corrects the COS.

              De: and all the rest you said, yes I agree. 🙂

            31. That’s some acceptance level 😉

              I haven’t looked into internet groups that criticise you and Marty, and I don’t feel like doing so, so I probably wont 😛 Curiosity killed the cat. And although I’m not a cat, I don’t need to know everything. But I would like to comm towards their direction and mine, that blaming in the name of SCN, makes as much sense as f@cking in the name of virginity 😛

            32. Spyros: I’m not a cat, I don’t need to know everything.

              Dee: LOL!

        1. Dragos, you are really nice. 🙂

          Just to let you know, my own “path” has taken me off into other things for the time being and it’s simply a matter of time limitations. If it weren’t for that I would be here joining the party! (Love that photo of your party mode, btw. :D) Anyway, I at least try to keep up with the comments. And I like the fact that you are making more comments than usual, sort of filling in for some of us absentees. 😉

          1. he he, that photo was taken on my 39th birthday 🙂 It was a nice day indeed 🙂 Doesn’t matter what’s up in life, keep up the good mood! 🙂 Cheers! 🙂

  19. Geir
    Have you thought about it recently how many people you have given a chance to MAKE a LIVING by providing the opportunity to work in your companies? Also, through them their families, friends….Have you thought about it that by doing so you also supported them in their goals of experiencing what this gift of being human is about? Some companies can come and go…so what? Change, that is.
    As I don’t know about your companies, I can only say one more thing…whatever happened, it was their personal responsibility, their ‘karma’ too in the cases when
    things didn’t run as smoothly as they ‘should have’…This ‘should have’ is interesting, as behind it are all the facts/reasons what your employees had to experience as a ‘lesson’ in their own lives. ‘Good’ or ‘bad’.

  20. Yesterday I made myself a proud author of a blasphemous anti-
    SCN message in Marty’s blog.

    I said more or less that despite what I think about LRH and the (potential) workability of some tech, SCN is rotting and better leave it.

    I got the idea to write it down, after I cognited for myself that my timetrack in SCN was all along a present time out ethics condition –a continuous overt act, that I ‘paid for’ by drawing motivators in. The motivators that I got were rationalised by myself and others as restimulations, PTS conditions and other bull…

    Anyway, the ‘moral lesson’ of this story is that I always knew it was overt to support the group, but based on data, ‘facts’ and claims I violated my own truth, which I always knew. If I didn’t know, it simply wouldn’t count as an overt for me.

    So, fellas I would suggest you trust yourselves and your own capacity to know. Screw what happened, what you have read, your calculations, estimations, expectations etc etc etc You can simple know by knowing. And it’s as simple as that, and it happens anyway, even if you later on complicate it 🙂

      1. Thanks 🙂

        Yes, it is on the enemy formula topic, near it’s end.

        I don’t want to forcefeed my truth on anybody. I want to make clear that this is 100% what happened with me. I simply should had never gotten in –COS or no COS. And it isn’t about ARCX’s, MUs and such stuff. Those were all incorrect items for me. It just wasn’t my game. Maybe another experiences it differently. That’s OK.

          1. Aw, Geir, did my description of your new photo offend you, where I said that the earnest and kind you came through? Maybe that’s not the image you like. I guess you prefer the tough guy image, like in the photoshopped avatar. Typical man. 😉

            1. Okay, good. Your feminine side is a good way of saying it.

              But what does this current avatar have to do with “wogs”? Or are you alluding to the original meaning?

    1. Spyros: Yesterday I made myself a proud author of a blasphemous anti-
      SCN message in Marty’s blog.

      Dee: Thanks love, great post.

  21. Actually, Geir, you might be offending some people with that Golliwog.. It’s usually considered a racist insult, which goes as far back as the 19th century, well before LRH used the term wog. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golliwogg

    In any case, here’s a BC tape excerpt where he describes what he means by “wog”. See what you think:

    “As I’ve just said, every thetan is, unless he’s knocked flat out…this fellow is operating to some degree, even if he’s just an effect. You see, he’s – he still can put out an impulse. See, he’s mostly effect, but he can put out a little bit of an impulse, see? Well, actually that would be an interiorized thetan who was VERY wog. And the word wog, of course, is in essence a “worthy oriental gentleman” as been defined by the Royal Air Force. There’s nothing derogatory in being called a wog. As a matter of fact, that was the source of a general order issued in Egypt on the complaint of the Egyptian government. The air force officers were calling Egyptians wogs. So the commanding officer defined it. And he said, “Well, wog, that means ‘worthy oriental gentleman’,” and insisted his officers use it. Those were in the days when the Empire wasn’t dead!

    “Anyway, this [wog] means a common, ordinary, run-of-the-mill, garden-variety humanoid. And a garden-variety humanoid means a person who has human characteristics. By which we define – not that he is human in his treatment of things – he isn’t. It’s simply that he is a body – he is a body. When you get way downhill, you get a person who is a body; he isn’t there as a spirit at all. Spirit is dead into the MEST of the – you know, the – it’s dead into the matter, energy, space and time, and it itself isn’t alive. The matter, energy, space and time is animate, do you see? He isn’t there at all. He doesn’t know he’s there, you see? Nothing. He’s, you know, wog. All right. Naturally, he’ll develop a philosophy that says everything is matter, including himself, see?

    “Now, that isn’t the bottom end of the scale; I couldn’t really tell you where the bottom end of the scale is. Haven’t been down there – lately, at least. The bottom end of the scale, however, would have in it as scale – there would be psychotic, neurotic, the person who was just totally motionless all the time, didn’t even know they were MEST, you know?…” (SHSBC-445 – 29.11.66)

    1. When ‘i’ AM (life-flow), it ‘expands’ into being ‘human’ making it fully A-LIVE….
      the Flow has the ability to ‘correct’ any disfunction in the body and in the mind, as long as the Flow is given more attention and is let exercise its ability…

      1. ‘Spirit…it’s dead into the matter, energy, space, time, and it itself isn’t alive’ – of course it IS alive not only ‘into’ but ‘as’…from one perception, mest IS alive.
        One can ‘think’ one is a body, it doesn’t take away anything from the ‘spirit’s’ aliveness.
        One can be aware of different is-nessess, different be-ingnesses from the body ‘all way up’ as manifestations of the Dynamics back to the Source…

      2. I do not doubt a bit of what you say here, Marianne. And I think that LRH was simply attempting to bring the individual who was not “human in his treatment of things” up to the point where he could be, and in just the way that you described..

        1. Yes, true. Ron spoke in ‘many ways’, always ‘fitting’ the ‘consciousness level’ of the
          ‘audience’. And yes, one can be aware of embodied consciousness through ‘being’
          a human as one has less and less automatisms.

    2. I know the reference. And I am so glad you found it. Because that is an excellent example of propaganda by redefinition of words. Exactly my point. And, I like the doll 🙂

      1. As regards “propaganda by redefinition of words”, in the HCOPL of the same title (5 Oct 71) critics tend to leave out the operative part of that PL:

        “The technique is good or bad depending on the ultimate objective of the propagandist.”

        LRH had to contend with an enormous amount of propaganda that existed at the time and I get that he was confronting the propagandists on their own terms, fighting fire with fire.

        And btw, don’t you think you yourself are engaging in propaganda and “redefinition of words” with your Golliwog, making it a symbol of something else than what it has been known to be?

        1. I don’t think so. According the the sources I can fin”Wog” does indeed come from the rag doll Golliwog. I use the usual dictionaries rather than invent new definitions.d on the Net,

          1. I don’t say “wog” doesn’t come from Golliwog. I am saying that you seem to be changing the meaning (i.e. redefining it) of Golliwog/wog from a racist insult to some kind of positive meaning – for the sheer purpose of protesting LRH’s own redefinition of the word. You are both propagandists, both with an “ultimate objective”.

            1. marildi: I am saying that you seem to be changing the meaning (i.e. redefining it) of Golliwog/wog from a racist insult to some kind of positive meaning – for the sheer purpose of protesting LRH’s own redefinition of the word.

              Dee: Love this battle, as I see it. Glad you’re back.

            2. All I am saying is that a) I like the Doll, and b) I want to be in contact with my wog self. Also, I wish I was black. I am not redefining anything, unlike Hubbard.

            3. “a) I like the Doll, and b) I want to be in contact with my wog self. Also, I wish I was black. I am not redefining anything, unlike Hubbard.”

              a) You mean just the look of it you like?
              b) What do you mean by your wog self exactly?
              And why do you wish you were black?

              Interesting conversation we’re having. 🙂

            4. a) I think it looks nice
              b) I am shedding more and more the Scientology cult think
              c) I don’t like to be so easily sun burned.

              Yes.

            5. a) It’s nice that you not only do not negate your feminine side but the kid in you as well. 🙂
              b) Me too, but I’m trying not to do a pendulum swing as that’s the same thing in disguise – preconceived ideas and unwillingness to look below the surface.
              c) Really? Aren’t there simpler and more realistic ways of preventing sunburn? Or are you just messing with me, Geir? 😉

            6. a) always 🙂
              b) I’m a straight shooter – going straight for the kill
              c) Better be really, really tanned that having to work on it through layers of sun burn. I envy my soul mate Feruzi and the outstanding Amani Sedoyeka.

            7. a) A kid and a kidder. 😉
              b) I just wish your motto wasn’t “Shoot first and ask questions later”.
              c) You are either the world’s biggest kidder or the world’s woggiest wog who ever wogged in wogdom. 😀

            8. Me too. LRH too.

              I’m curious about something, Geir. Please tell me honestly how many people you have met who increased their “potency” (a good word for it and one you once used on the subject) to as great a degree as you did in Scientology but did so through some other practice. I’m asking about the relative increase, mind you, since people start out at different levels of ability and potential.

              Actually, another question too. Considering all you got from Scientology, which you yourself have said was of huge benefit, can’t you find it in your heart to forgive LRH his flaws?

            9. As I have said before, it is never about forgiving or not. It is purely about reflecting honestly and find the truth. Always.

              As for others with similar boosts: Brendan is one. I know others that are unknown to you. I would say Tony Robbins, Dalai Lama… there are many, I think.

            10. “As I have said before, it is never about forgiving or not. It is purely about reflecting honestly and find the truth. Always.”

              Okay, I get that. But I also still get that you have not forgiven LRH for his flaws in spite of all he did for you.

              On the second question, you didn’t actually answer it. The question related to people who went from point A to point whatever as a result of the use of whatever practice – i.e. what was their practice and how did the advance they made compare to yours?

              I don’t care if they are unknown to me. I just want and trust that you will take an honest look at this and tell me what you know. Dalai Lama has been involved in Buddhism for many lifetimes, but do we know what he gained from it in this particular lifetime? To be clear, I’m talking about people’s current lifetime changes, as compared to yours. With Tony Robbins I have no idea if he even got his ability from something other than himself – which is a different subject. Brendan’s story would be very interesting to know.

            11. Marildi: “Okay, I get that. But I also still get that you have not forgiven LRH for his flaws in spite of all he did for you.”

              Me: Then you didn’t “get that”.

              There is no process or methodology responsible for anything. People are responsible, not machines, subjects, methodologies or religions.

              Some people use Christianity to catalyze their own responsibility, some use Scientology, some use real life and living. Brendan got from “a kid” to one hell of an amazing person. Without any Scientology. And I fear that he would have been less had he gotten himself involved in it. Scientology is not for everyone. As for the people I know to have expanded in leaps, I am not going to out names or tell other people’s personal stories. There are many ways to Rome. Trust me.

            12. “There is no process or methodology responsible for anything. People are responsible, not machines, subjects, methodologies or religions.”

              This is semantics, Geir. You yourself have used the wording of having made gains from Scientology. With one wording or another, you related those gains to Scientology.

              Isn’t it possible for you and I to have an honest comm cycle, with the intention to truly understand where the other is coming from rather than to prove something we are convinced of and/or skirt around anything that challenges it? I’m trying to do that and I hope you are too.

              So will you please answer my question? It has nothing to do with the various ways people can make gains, including on their own – or any of the other topics you diverted to. And I never asked you to give specific names either – that was your origination. Here again is the only question I have asked, and I quote:

              Please tell me honestly how many people you have met who increased their “potency” (a good word for it and one you once used on the subject) to as great a degree as you did in Scientology but did so through some other practice.

            13. The problem as I see it is that you don’t follow my evolving viewpoints. I previously said the Scientology was responsible for my gains. I no longer believe that.

              But in order to answer your viewpoint from your angle: At least 5 people – but I haven’t been able to assess this with very many people.

            14. “The problem as I see it is that you don’t follow my evolving viewpoints. I previously said the Scientology was responsible for my gains. I no longer believe that.”

              What I thought you were saying most recently is that although you got gains all along as you did Scientology, the actuality was that you yourself were accomplishing those gains by means of the placebo effect and that you felt such placebo gains would be possible with other practices too. I should have phrased my question in those terms.

              So do I understand you correctly now that at least 5 people you know advanced as much as you did by means of some practice (placebo) that gave them an equivalent gain? And if that is correct, I’m also interested in what practices they used.

            15. Chris: Many!

              Dee: I’ll add another many onto that. Seek and you’ll find.

            16. Marildi wrote about shedding her own Scientology cult think:

              “Me too, but I’m trying not to do a pendulum swing as that’s the same thing in disguise – preconceived ideas and unwillingness to look below the surface.

              When you’ve been lied to about LRH, his history, the true history of Scientology, and its true origins, and also subjected to socially coercive techniques to keep you from thinking for yourself, the “pendulum swing” as you put it, can be a very appropriate response.

              Why?

              Because Scientology is in many ways exactly the opposite of what Scientologists have been taught it was.

              Even though Scientologists are made to believe that Scientology produces more freedom for people, on the whole, it does not. And for some, standard Scientology applied exactly as Ron wrote it, produces outright slavery – intentionally so.

              Even though Scientologists are made to believe that Scientology produces more spiritual awareness, it does not. It produces only indoctrination into its own ideology. When Scientologists are made to believe that they are studying the human mind and the human spirit, they are actually only studying the ideology that Scientology teaches about those things, not what those things actually are.

              So when a Scientologist really begins to look at Scientology – all parts of it – which they finally do as they are getting out of it and are no longer under the socially coercive control of L Ron Hubbard’s ethics and justice and PTS/SP tech, it is quite legitimate to do a full pendulum swing for a while as you see so much that was the opposite of what you thought it was this whole time.

              However, staying positive about your cult experience, and always trying not to “catastrophize” it, is very smart, and constructive and productive of faster motion as you move on down the road from Scientology.

              So give yourself some slack, Maridli. And let yourself feel whatever it is you are going to feel. Don’t worry about being “wog”, or “down-tone” or even “SP” or “PTS”. Those were all just labels to control the natural human emotion and reaction to having been spiritually exploited, and brutally betrayed.

              Geir has created a very positive and constructive space to un-indoctrinate one’s self here on his blog. It is an advance over what has been available for Scientologists in the past.

              But having been there myself, make sure you let yourself feel whatever you are going to feel. And let yourself say whatever you are going to say. There is no such thing as a “low-toned” emotion. There are just emotions. And while a person can think with cognitive distortions for a while where it all seems like a huge catastrophe, that passes too, in time. And what takes its place is a stronger, smarter, and more enlightened human being.

              Alanzo

            17. Alanzo wrote: “So give yourself some slack, Maridli. And let yourself feel whatever it is you are going to feel. Don’t worry about being “wog”, or “down-tone” or even “SP” or “PTS”. Those were all just labels to control the natural human emotion and reaction to having been spiritually exploited, and brutally betrayed… make sure you let yourself feel whatever you are going to feel. And let yourself say whatever you are going to say.”

              Geeze, Alanzo, can you not see how smug you come across when you assume all you do about me and that I need your little lecture. I have absolutely none of those concerns.

              Same goes for your summation of LRH and Scientology. Did it ever occur to you that maybe you are the one who is the most loaded with fixed ideas – ones that are absolutes, at that. Tsk tsk. 😛

              Good thing I still find you to be likable in some ways. I actually do. (That’s the thing I should probably be worried about. :D)

            18. Alanzo: And what takes its place is a stronger, smarter, and more enlightened human being.

              Dee: So true. 🙂 When my mate and I started following, reading another spiritual viewpoint we, having the background that we had, found out so much more that made sense, and without becoming attached to it as others were. We felt fortunate to have had Scn training and gains and it increased with other viewpoints in our life. I agreed to go back to Scn later after a heavy loss, for one purpose and that was for certainty in a specific area, and I got that. Meanwhile, I found out what the current real scene was there, and eventually finding out the truth, enlightened me further to actually come to the road of freedom from any one study, cult or guru.

              I also agree with “Geir has created a very positive and constructive space to un-indoctrinate one’s self here on his blog. It is an advance over what has been available for Scientologists in the past.”

            19. It is a mistaken idea that one can avoid pendulum swings. Social change swings wide. That’s a basic physics of this universe. There’s no precise center of gravity as the world is in motion. Thus the pendulums swing and swing and swing. There’s not a precise equilibrium. And if there were? We wouldn’t know where exactly it was.

            20. Chis: Thus the pendulums swing and swing and swing.

              Dee: I agree and I remember loving to swing a lot, so what’s new, back and forth, what wonderful fun life can be.

            21. Well written deE. It is a roiling universe in which we live. Finding optimum harmony and balance is my purpose, not survival. I am not trying to live. I am trying to live well.

            22. Chris: Finding optimum harmony and balance is my purpose, not survival.

              Dee: Mine too, as balance is important to living well. We survive no matter what, even when the body dies IMO.

            23. Chris: That’s worth exploring!

              I’ve been interested and exploring before Scn and after. I have no doubt at all.
              It is worth exploring, if it interests one.

            24. Chris: I’ve come to think that none of what everybody knows about living, birthing and dying is laid out quite right.

              Dee: Only important thing is what you know, from all the bits and pieces you look at and tune into what senses or feels right for you. Who cares how others lay it out, pick and choose since you’re the boss in that area.
              Oh, there I go with opinions, but they are mine anyway and have nothing else to do with them but give them away ….. he he!

            25. Marildi wrote:

              Geeze, Alanzo, can you not see how smug you come across when you assume all you do about me and that I need your little lecture. I have absolutely none of those concerns.

              You said that you did not want to do a “pendulum swing”. I assumed that this meant that you did not want to appear to be “anti-Scientology” after being so “pro-Scientology”. That’s the pendulum swing I thought you were referring to.

              Were you referring to another “pendulum swing”?

              And, why would you have no concern of Scientology enslaving people, like it’s most hardworking and dedicated staff members? And why would you have no concern that Scientology doesn’t teach about the actual human mind, for instance, but only teaches about its own ideological stance on the human mind, and leaves all scientific data and empirical evidence un-recognized and un-used?

              I would think those things would concern you a lot as a Scientologist.

              Why don’t they? Is it because, as a Scientologist, you care only about yourself and your own wins and no one else?

              Alanzo

            26. Alanzo: Is it because, as a Scientologist, you care only about yourself and your own wins and no one else?

              Dee: That reminded me of when I was a Martyr for years and the person I adored could do no wrong. It took me years to face the truth.

            27. You’ve got me thinking about Scientology again, Marildi.

              You’ve read about the Stanford Prison Experiment, right? That experiment was done in 1970, after which LRH created “Expanded Dianetics”, kept running the Sea Org, started chasing Paulette Cooper, and infiltrating the government in Operation Snow White.

              With all of the revelations about the human mind that Philip Zimbardo’s experiment gave us, and which has been repeated in many different places and times with the same or similar results, why do you think LRH felt no need to include those results into Scientology?

              If he had, most of the abuses in the Sea Org would have never happened. If he had, the idea of “SPs” would have been called into question.

              But since he didn’t, and since he kept Scientologists in the dark about it, don’t you think it is true that you don’t really learn about the human mind in Dn and Scn, but only about the ideology of the mind that Hubbard wanted you to believe – and be loyal to?

              What do you think about this idea of all those discoveries, with actual empirical testing going on in the society on the human mind, and L Ron Hubbard not even calling attention to them in his writings?

              Not only was there the Stanford Prison Experiment, but also the discovery, development and testing of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, and so much else.

              How can Dn and Scn be considered knowledge of the human mind when these other discoveries are completely ignored in its literature?

              I really would like your intelligent and educated opinion on this.

              Alanzo

            28. Alanzo: You’ve read about the Stanford Prison Experiment, right?

              I was advised by Nancy Many to read that book from Amazon and didn’t have to read the whole thing before I cog’ed and got it. Truly a must read and explains so much even in the first part. Good mention.

      2. Isene: Because that is an excellent example of propaganda by redefinition of words. Exactly my point. And, I like the doll 🙂

        Dee: Cheers to the cute doll and all it stands for!

  22. I prefer the icebear…just out of intuition.
    If I had to find considerations for my preference…hm. the icebear doesn’t have considerations…no ‘cultural’ concepts…’raw’ Life in its beauty….

Have your say

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s